I've just completed the first draft of my second romance novel, and I have to say the thing that is essential for me in any novel, not just romance, is emotional realism. The characters and events have to ring true, otherwise I'm not interested....Both characters in a romance have to be grappling with issues of their own that are brought out when they meet - just like real life where we are drawn to people who will force us to deal with our emotional baggage. As they struggle with their feelings for each other etc they both have to go through a transformation that makes them better people and they have to learn to have compassion and understanding for each other. For me this is the essence of romance, but sadly many, if not most romances out there are based on cheap thrills and underdeveloped characters who go through a series of contrived misunderstandings before finding their happy ending.
One romance writer who really annoys me is Nora Roberts. I always get sucked into her books but about halfway through they just degenerate into cliches and ridiculous plots, and then I feel angry that I've wasted so much time reading them. Her problem is that she's an industry and she's churned out hundreds of books which are basically the same. I know she's made a lot of money from it but I really wonder how people can do that and not feel that they're prostituting their talent. That's the whole problem with the romance genre in my opinion - too many people in it for the easy money, which results in some really bad books that drag the whole genre down.
I'm reading a novel by Amanda Quick right now, and I have to say that I'm finding it rather annoying. The "relationship" is mostly borne out of a sudden lustful spark, the characters are completely off the wall (the guy has an eye patch and long hair and looks like a pirate and the girl is a bookworm who has never left the country yet considers herself "a woman of the world.") There's this elaborate scheme that they should pretend to be married in case someone tries to damage her reputation while traveling with him. (They obviously get found out in a very predictable fashion.) He keeps comparing her to a siren and making references to songs in a very repetitive and obvious fashion. She is a total ingenue... And yet I'm still reading. Go figure.
yes i like this too. its about having different levels and u get to know the characters individualy instead of just the romance which doesnt really define them. and so u can see the beauty of how there love came about and why. thats why there so succesful unfortunatly a love story cant always have this theme/storyline. my favorite love story is a slow passed one. i love romance novels but there are so many that rush the the bringing of their love together and are so focused on the physical side of a relationship. i like the looks acroos the room, the getting to know one another, misunderstandings and learning from them, a slight brush of the hand. all these little things make my heart flutter and by the end of it you just want them to be together so much which makes them more memorable and when it happens so happy but i dont think theres any one way about it. just personal preference. and often theres no better format for a romance novel, just depends on the characters and how they were brought together and their interaction to one another.
yess this happens alot in romancee novels and its rather tiresome i want something beautiful, meaningful and original. something ill remember and make my heart flutter from the joy of there love yesss i agree this is very importanttt. im currently trying to write a romance novel probably just for a bit of fun but still...and its controversial (sibling incest) and i really wanted to create something that was deep and meaningful. something beautiful and incredibly sad with all the issues surrounding this love and a tragic ending. something that touches the reader and makes them feel everything.
I also noticed that romance tend to be written by women. Is it rare to have a romance written by a man? Edit: I'm not trying to sound sexist. This is just what I've observed.
Alright, I am going to be the one swimming against the current here. I LOVE cheesy romance novels. I have enough drama in my life. Give me the fantasy, give me the fairy tale where everybody's dreams come true. Where the woman is unrealistically beautiful but still plucky and smart and the brute of a man is tuff but still has a softer side. Where he sweeps her off her feet and saves the day. Because here's the thing...we all go through the real stuff everyday. Part of what makes romance novels so good (and so bad) is they give us the fantasy. They have nothing to do with real life, honestly, (unless the writer is particularly good) but we get to escape for a few blissful hours into the land of love AND lust at first sight, with steamy sex a happy ending to boot. Not for serious reading, but a rainy afternoon or a lazy day escapism in bed. My favorite authors in this genre are Elizabeth Lowell (who said that she likes to write about the conflict that arise from peoples strengths, rather than their weakness) and Johanna Lindsay. I think that is why Nicholas Sparks gets on my nerves so badly. I mean, I LOVED The Notebook, but why does he ALWAYS have to kill everybody off? Sheesh.
north and south by elizabeth gaskell still stands as one of my favorite romances its not focused entirely on the romance theres other plots with it but thats why i like it its nice how they all merge together.
yess i agreeee. but i thinkk it would be quite interesting to read one by a man. see how it differ's from a womans point of veiw. i have read books by a man with a small romance plot included but not a wwhole novel dedicated to that one romance.
Because... <__< ... >___> *Checks for any other men in this topic* I want to try to do that. Write a romance.
yeahh i wasnt a bigg fan of the notebook either. too tragic and sad for my taste. i do love happy fairytale romances as long as their atleast a bit believable and interesting, but i dont like those books where itss all about the physical attraction and then the emotion. there so tiresome, i want something meaningful and sweet.
I'm not a fan of the love-at-first-sight type and, for me, for a romance to be excellent there has to be things like conflicts and understandings which then pull in compromises, trust, and humor into the story. More than passion and desire and all the grand things, simple and natural exchanges in situations range from ordinary everyday to extreme turns impress me the most.
:S now this whole topic is leaving me confused on how to approach the concept of ice cold love..i know what it is and like it...but it seems imagining love of whatever kind and writing it are two different things i find the concept of ice cold love quite interesting at points,especially because it can wind up in a sort of malignant,twisted form that can make a person do unspeakable things..case in point,the movie "rampage" directed by uwe boll like what i would considering to be a romantic and swooning excerpt under that doctrine "Forget the bombs forget the victims Just fire - fire and forget Forget all ethics forget all morals Just fire - fire and forget – fire and forget! and All these laser-guided bombs Will soon become out-dated There`s no more need for guidance Just fire - fire and forget excerpts from a fav song of mine
I like the tragedy of love usually with a happy ending. I've read novels with endings that don't end happily and that's is okay at times, but most of the times I do prefer either happy endings or bitter-sweet endings because I am investing so much in these characters that I don't want to feel cheated in the end. There is a difference between ending it tragically yet satisfyingly vs. plain tragic that it feels like you've been raped (may be a harsh word, but I usually despise books that leave me feeling like I wasted my time, especially when something starts out very promising.) Also, sometimes, the tragedy itself is TOO much. Does that makes sense? Where the character have TOO much off a bad thing that instead of liking them, I pity them. Or where authors just keep giving them one thing after another and it just never seems to end. So with that, I have to say that good romance is a balance of many different things and can't be pinpointed down to certain themes over others. Love doesn't require tragedy in my opinion, it requires care and nurture in almost all situations. And that doesn't don't just hold true to romantic relationships, but all relationships. I think tragedy in romance is a theme that is overused because it makes the reader sympathize from the get-go, so you're more attached emotionally, but it can still be written horribly. An overwhelming theme can both add and detract from a book to where the story is about the theme more than anything else, which is fine, but it depends on exactly what type of story you want to write. But like everything else, what makes a good romance isn't themes and motifs and such, but more how well it's executed. That's just how I feel.
LOL I've had the discussion on Nicholas Sparks many times. I do hate is stories but I still think he is a good author to study as far as writing style is concerned.
ah yes...you perfectly highlighted the reason why i hate halo reach the ending was so poorly and simply executed that it left me depressed and then enraged...that sort of caustic ending should be done like the ending of one of the front mission videogames (forget which one) the scene is where an ancient system has been activated,spewing killing bots and the such into the air...the main player char (hence your customized mech),is pitted against these things,your fighting the exploding drones,,all the while they keep on coming by the thousands,the explosion blasting off chunks of your armor...when it gets especially bad,the screen slowly fades to black while a woman says "{we must fight,it is our way" one of the best swooning bits if i ever heard one
I like the same things in books but it makes you wonder why you rarely find books like this and I've come to the conclusion that it's because: Sex sells. I swear, that is the main reason why books like this don't seem to be popular. Sex has become a standard in the most popular romance novels these days. It's hard to find books that don't have sex or don't focus on pure lust - and if you do, it's labeled as Christian romance, or the romance is just a subplot to a even bigger plot. Even the lightest chic-lit these days have non-explicit sex scenes through out the books. And with the rise of Harlequin romance that boomed in the 50's and 60's which capitalized on sex, it seems like it's become a market expectation and trend so strong that to hedge away from it and make yourself known in industry is a hard thing to do. If you read author interviews etc, I don't even know how many times I've seen the phrase amongst romance authors where they say "if you don't have a good sex scene, you can't sell a book these days." I'm sure this is not the rule, but it does hold some truth. And the problem with writing sex scenes in novels as you described is that it cheapens the overall book. To have sex scenes, you have to bring the emotions to a surface level. A physical level and it compromises emotional realism that you have built up. There are exceptions and I've seen both where neither have been compromised, but usually, I've noticed that those books are extremely long and deal with multiple issues, not just romance and for this being a first-time novel, unless you defy industry standards, it's hard to do. There are a few authors that completely defy all of this and their work is still considered romance (like Haruki Murakami), but I've notice that this when authors focus on the overall style and theme of the novel more than it being about the direct character relationships. Anyways, this is just my conclusions from what I have seen and is only a part of some of the hurdles in this genre. Anyone have any other thoughts or different ideas of other things of why these types of books are hard to find and make popular?
I agree that sex is definitely a significant part of a romance these days--at least the modern ones--and there is usually included at least 1 sex scene that varies in level of description.
Wow, I never knew there were so many romance writers and -readers on here, because people hardly ever speak about it, I actually thought I was alone now it feels even more fun writing about it that I know people actually read it (haha, I know, but people almost never admit that, they always read "high ambition books" when you ask them, LOL.)
ha...yeah.. aspirations are far different from actual product alot of the time,especially with me me searching eternally for the holy grail of inspiration i need reminds me of the song "lost viking" by dethklok
Really now? You make some good points in your post, but I quoted what I don't necessarily agree with. I can think of a number of classics that include such scenes, and certainly aren't cheap. So I'd say it very much depends. Also why do you think 'emotional realism' would be compromised? Can there not be emotion in a physical relationship? Disclaimer: I don't read romance novels or chick lit at all. But a book that includes romance? Fine by me, if the story is good.
Would it be accurate to say you weren't expecting a GUY of all people to start a thread about romance?
Probably because a lot of readers read romance as a lonely escapism because they're frustrated - both emotionally and probably sexually. And in the end I think modern society has kinda lost the plot when it comes to relationships - I mean in real life, not in novels. People nowadays seem to think if you're in a relationship but not sleeping together, then how can you know you should marry him/her? How can you possibly be in love? Sex has become the ONLY expression of true love - and it is also an easy way to express love and passion. I think this is why there're so many broken relationships out there. Sex has become a cheap thing that people sell like it's trash and people are too afraid to say no for fear of being rejected - somehow they feel that they must give their body in sex in order to be loved. People have forgotten that sex is the expression of love, not the foundation of love. And hence, perhaps the romance novels that are not selling sex doesn't quite meet the audience's needs because in their heads, they have a warped/unhealthy view of love and sex. Sex is the symbol of passion and thrill - so what other types of thrills can you conjure up in a romance novel anyway? Sex is the very expression and symbol of being desired, wanted, and most importantly, needed. It's just a very cheap and easy way of exploiting all those needs in a reader. But to detail an actual relationship with all the desire and being needed - almost uncontrolled and wild and certainly passionate - in day-to-day prose depicting someone's day-to-day relationship (for example, talking about utility bills, venting about a boss, or perhaps whether you prefer stuffed peppers for dinner or would you rather have lasagne? Oh and I'm too tired to do the laundry today - I know you did the dishes already but please don't make me get up from the couch?) - well that just isn't very exciting and it'd be very difficult to picture desire and passion in that sorta setting - which would be the real setting of a real relationship. Sex is fantasy - and in the end, people who read a certain genre want a certain kinda fantasy and usually, for romance readers, it's the illusion of being loved. And unfortunately in this society, sex has become confused with love but nonetheless, people have begun to believe that they need sex to be fulfilled.
