Wed Reading Meme
May. 3rd, 2017 08:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Still reading The Witches of Karres by John Schmitz which is more of a sci-fantasy and sort of comical, although I've never laughed, just smiled. My sense of humor is very dry and more towards witty, puns and absurdist humor for absurdity sake (see Hitchhiker's Guide) doesn't really work for me. It's hit or miss. If I feel like the book is just one joke after another, I get rather bored. In regards to Terry Pratchett, I don't really know if I like Pratchett or not. I loved "The Amazing Maurice and His Educated Rodents" which I fought was a rather clever take on the Pied Piper of Hamlin, except with a clever cat working with clever mice. But "Good Omens" written by Gaiman and Pratchett started to drag, it was funny to start, but the joke was drug out too long and began to wear thin (sort of similar to my issues with Hitchhiker and The Palace Job.) The other one I tried and could not get through was "Monstrous Regiment" - which I had to look up and bored me silly. It was a clearly a satire about war, but I don't do well with satire for satire's sake -- that's my problem with Jonathan Swift and 98% of American Satirical comedies ("The Good Place", "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt", "The Office", "Crazy Ex-Girlfriend" and "The Simpsons"). Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they are poorly written or anything, just that I get impatient and bored during them, because the "satire" and "themes" are more important than the characters or the characters arcs. Yes, the characters are interesting and even complex, but..I feel distanced from them somehow, as if they are satirical tropes. And they are. Nothing wrong with that, but, I'm a "character" gal as an old college buddy likes to say. Character sort of comes above all else with me. Not everyone is like that. Most folks aren't. And that's okay, although I wish it was the opposite, but what can you do, and differences and diversity make life interesting.
Anyhow..as a result I don't know if I like Prachett. I've only tried three books that he wrote. One - I loved, and remember fairly well, one disappointed me, and one just could not finish (which was a shame because it was a gift from a dear friend at the time, who thought I'd love it. I had to side-step that with her.) Sort of like Opera, I don't know if I like Opera -- only really seen Carmen, listened to some on CD (high soprano, doesn't do a lot for me -- my parents love it and played it constantly when I visited for a while there), parts of a comic opera, and listened to Mozart (I love listening to Mozart, how can you not?). Should try the city Opera at some point, be warned not to try the Met, it's pricey and not comfortable.
I do however love Gilbret & Sullivan Operettas...I've seen every single one in the space of a month on VHS, plus two performed by a G&S troop. We did the Mikado in high school (I was on the makeup crew, which was fun. As a result, I saw the Mikado a million times and almost have it memorized. I adored it.) See, that's interesting -- because G&S is pure satire and parody, yet I find it hilarious and loved it. (Hmmm, haven't seen it in a while though...so it is possible my tastes changed).
I don't know if I like Roger Zelzany either, just that I could not finish "Lord of Light" but that means nothing. It's possible I'd like another one of his books?
Too many books, too little time. Which makes me wonder why I am writing three at the moment. Oh that's right, because no one else has written them and I want to read those stories.
2.) Romance Genre has a frigging lot of sub-genres, some favorable, some....that ahem give it a bad name and make me wonder about people. This is unfortunately about the latter...and yes, I've read a lot of it, so I feel qualified to rant about it for a bit. (I only feel qualified to rant and rip apart things that I've experienced and read. Not that that always stops me...unfortunately, and much to be my own chagrin, but still.)
Was wandering about on Amazon during work, and Amazon being Amazon decided to rec Paper Princess by someone named Erin Watt..who is an erotica writer, writing a YA romance novel or at least this is marketed as a YA. I think Amazon rec'd it because I'd read Royally Matched and Royally Screwed and this story appeared to be in the same vein? Who knows? Amazon can't figure me out any longer -- it's just throwing everything at me including the kitchen sink.
Anyhow the title perked my interest. So I checked it out. And...I think YA may be the wrong subgenre for it? The marketing blurb is rather amusing.
Uhm, hate to break this to you, but that isn't "Young Adult", young adult is teens, between 14-18 usually. (ie. Twilight, The Hunger Games, Maze). 17 and up is New Adult - basically college kids. Post-high school age readers. (ie. 50 Shades of Grey, CrossFire, Colleen Hoover's books, Beautiful Disaster, etc.)
New Adult often syncs into the Billionaire Boys Club romances -- which is basically 50 Shades of Grey erotica Cinderella fantasies. Think Cinderella, except her Prince is into BDSM or rough sex. But not always does it sync into this ...sometimes it's more along the lines of Colleen Hoover and Jamie McGuire novels which is melodramatic teen sex romances. They are either in college, high school, or somewhere in between...having lots of forbidden elicit sex. The reason the writer goes younger -- is the want the virgin and the badboy trope or in some scenarios the naughty girl/bad boy trope. But unless the girl is 17-22, you can't really make it a big deal that she's having sex in contemporary romance novels.
Our society for some reason or other assumes that EVERYONE has had sex and lots of it by the age of 30, actually in romance novels and discussion boards, it appears to be 18. People were very upset that the lead character in a recent popular erotic novel had not had any sex and was 25, because that was far too old for their delicate sensibilities for someone to lose their virginity. This isn't true by the way. In fact nothing could be further from the truth. But people are so uptight and have such an inferiority/superiority complex regarding their sexual habits/history and others that they can't handle the mere concept that not everyone has the same sexual history that they do or has done the same things or is remotely interested in the same way or turned on in the same way. Because oh dear, if they aren't, what is wrong with me?? Sigh. If a lot of people haven't had sex by 25 or 30, and they have, then they get upset. So of course it's the opposite. If you haven't had sex by that time, obviously something is wrong with you -- they think. (There isn't. There is NOTHING wrong with you if you have not had sex. Despite what our media and culture states - sex does not necessarily equal happiness or health. It's not a prerequisite. And it is NOT the same for everyone. We are not a one size fits all society, regardless of what our television writers, novelists, etc think and tell you.) This is all very annoying. What one does, is, feels, or experiences sexually is private, personal thing, unique to them, end of story. We really do need to stop judging ourselves and each other regarding sex. We'll all be much happier if we did.
Examples of what I'm talking about:
* I actually had a friend read a story of mine, in which the lead character was 25-26 years of age and a virgin. She said it was unrealistic and no one would buy the story. The friend had had a lot of sex by that stage so clearly everyone else had too. Anything else was unrealistic and not believable because it did not relate her experience. (Weird, I thought we were supposed to dip into another's experience reading a book, not a reflection and/or validation of our own. And how sad is it that we as a society require that? )
* Another friend told me that the Gilmore Girls was unrealistic in regards to Rory Gilmore, because she didn't lose her virginity by her freshman year of college, because obviously everyone did. (Again my friend needed her own experience validated. I don't know why. Was she embarrassed about it? Did she judge herself harshly for some reason, and so judged everyone who didn't have that experience? There's nothing wrong with losing your virginity during your freshman year, unless of course it's date rape -- which unfortunately was how a lot of freshman girls lost theirs. Hence the shame factor. They got drunk, ended up in a guy's dorm room, heavy petting ensued, they vaguely remember trying to stop it/saying no/pushing him away, but he won't because he's drunk too, but not drunk enough not to get it up...and hello, date rape, but it's impossible to prove and they aren't sure it is date rape. And the guy's boasting, and the gal feels dumb as shit and does the walk of shame home. Ugh. I lost count of the number of friends who told me this story somewhat shamefaced in college. And yes, they were date-raped. And yes, the guy is responsible. And yes, if you are that guy? You deserve whatever karmic hell came at you years later. Why? Because when someone tells you to stop or tries to stop you, you fucking ass stop. Personally? I'd have kicked the guy in balls, hard, repeatedly. Ladies, if a guy date rapes you? Kick him in the balls, do it three times, hard. Make sure he's on the floor screaming and holding those unmentionables. All rapists should be kicked three times a day in the balls for a year.)
* And I remember reading a post online years ago by a twenty-something music promoter who said she'd finally had sex and was now a "woman" because it wasn't until she'd had sexual intercourse with a man that she could truly become a woman. She was but a girl before then.
* And...I'm not done. There was a fanfic writer, once, who stated that bad sex scenes in fanfic were obviously written by people who had never had sex and she felt very sorry for them, because she had a ton of it. (Honey, I remember thinking at the time, hate to break it to you but you can't tell if a person has had sex or not by reading fanfic. Also, it's not the lack of sexual experience, it's the lack of knowledge of human anatomy, and you yourself apparently have that problem. Because I'm sorry, unless you are a professional contornist, that position just isn't anatomically possible. Pick up an anatomy book. Pronto. Seriously, a lot of fanfic writers clearly got bored of their sex scenes and decided to come up with...one's that defy logic. I get that Buffy is a vampire slayer and Spike is a vampire -- but they aren't members of cirque de soleil, at least I checked. And ow. Just ow.) Sigh.
See? Evidence right there that our society is insecure about sex - their own, others, how others view them, etc. Also, oddly obsessed with it. We are. It's hilarious if you think about it. Every situation comedy on television, including the family ones, is obsessed with sex.
All you have to do is look at how we are handling gender and LGBTQIA issues to see the depth of the problem. L (Lesbian) G (Gay), B (Bisexual) T (Transgender) Q (Queer) I (Intersex) A (Asexual or Ally) or so I'm told by the internet. There's a Lingo Bingo night at my church to familarise myself with it if I'm so inclined. Personally, I think people care way too much about how we each identify ourselves and what we're all doing behind closed doors for our own good.
Why does it matter when someone else has it? How they have it? If they have it? Who they choose to do it with? What they fantasize? As long as it is consential, no rape, no sexual violence, I don't see an issue.)
Enuf of the rant.
Sigh. According to the reviews there is an awful cliffhanger, which appears to be the routine in New Adult romance novels. You only get the crazy cliffhangers in the New Adult and sometimes the Young Adult contemporary. You don't get them in the historical romances, the adult contemporary romances, just the frigging YA and New Adult for some reason. And they don't help the story. If anything they stretch it too thin.
So, yes, you silly marketing people, you did intend to write an awful cliffhanger. Who do you think you are fooling? You did it so you could sell two books not just one, possibly even a series of books -- because hello, we have six boys, which lends itself to a series...it just writes itself.
I despise the New Adult genre.
It's taken the place of the 1970s/1990s boddice ripper genre. Except that genre was better written -- the characters, plot and world far more developed. Less sex. More character. If you want to read a good smutty, nasty little novel -- go read Rosemary Rodgers "The Crowd Pleasers" or "Love Play" or "The Insiders" -- these were trashy contemporary romance novels with kinky sex and bad boy men, and lots of rough sex bordering on rape, but not quite. (Which was actually my main problem with them -- sex in a lot of the boddice ripper contemporaries was in anger or a power-play between the characters and bordered on rape. It was a topic women felt they needed to explore in depth -- particularly during a time period where female sexuality was so controversial. You really do need to understand the context of the time period -- women were in some respects more confined than they are now.) I read the Crowd Pleasers when I was a teenager, because my mother had it, hidden in her bookshelves, top shelf. (I was industrious). So I'm amused by the ladies on Amazon whinging about impressionable teens reading this book. I read Rosemary Rodgers and Harold Robbins, who admittedly were better writers, but far smuttier. Not to mention more honest about it, since their characters were in their 20s and 30s, not teens. (And I survived. I discussed them with my Mom, it didn't twist me or anything.)
Regarding historical romance novels, if you want to avoid the "boddice ripper" or "rape as seduction" stories, just don't read any historical romances published prior to 2010. Apparently 2010 is the cut off? Or 2007? Somewhere in there. That's when the New Adult took over the boddice ripper category, and the historicals became a bit more...palpable. Yes, there's sex, but it's nice sex and the guys are nice for the most part.
You also might want to avoid Judith McNaught, Rosemary Rodgers, Fern Michaels, Kathleen Woodliss, and I can't remember the others.
Anyhow this particular story (Paper Princess) is apparently about a teenage girl, who has recently turned 17, in her junior or senior year of high school. (I thought people graduated at 17? It's admittedly been awhile. My brother graduated before he turned 18. I think I graduated after just turning 18. We were spring birthdays. He graduated at mid-term.] Anyhow, the girl in question, has lost her mother to cancer. To pay the bills she's working in strip joint, because apparently no one can hire her to wait tables? Nor does the owner care that she's underage, working in a bar, and if they catch him, he loses his license and goes to jail? Her dad is nowhere to be found and known to her as the sperm doner, But not so fast, in reality he was a billionaire playboy, who gets upset when he finds out he has a daughter and means to do right by her, but alas before he can dies tragically in a plane crash. So he somehow, prior to the plane crash, convinced his best friend and business partner, Callum Royal to become his daughter's legal guardian and take her in, until she comes of age. (She's 17 and been working in a strip joint and pays rent on an apartment.) He agrees, knowing nothing about her. And shows up at her school with the paperwork. She thinks he's a perv, takes off, and hunts a higher paying job to get away from said perv...the higher paying job is stripping naked at another strip joint -- an older one. (Seriously?) whose owner has been pushing her to do. (This happens within the first five pages of the sample I read.)Before she was just "pole dancing" apparently. Anyhow, turns out the legal guardian has a bunch of boys, all big, strapping, muscular lads, who go to a prep school and screw the girls there. Literally, not figuratively. And the nastiest of the bunch is "Reed" who is the wounded bad boy that lost his mom. He goes after the adopted princess, after the guardian hog-ties her and brings her into his abode. They have "ust" and finally rough sex..plus date rape in there somewhere...or attempted date rape..according to the reviews.
And...it was marketed as Young Adult. I think whoever marketed this screwed up. It screams New Adult. And it has all the nasty cliches from that genre. I get the fantasy. A lot of people have wicked fantasies. Don't judge them. I'm sure you have wicked fantasies too. We really don't need to discuss them. But it does annoy me a little that these wicked books get as many five star reviews on Good Reads and Amazon and make a ton of money...when in the end, all they are really is wicked fantasy porn with a bit of plot. Plus, you can sort of get the same thing for free at fanfic sites and erotica sites, just saying.
But New Adult is a legitimate subgenre of romance, and I think it does say something about how we view gender, sex, ourselves and why Trump is President. There's this weird ass ingrained take on gender roles in our culture and sex. It's rather misogynistic and a little misanthropic, if you think about it. Humans can be self-hating bastards.
What's interesting? Is I've come across a few male/male slash contemporary romance novels that play with the same New Adult Tropes...there's one entitled "Bagged by a Billionaire - Arden #1" -- sort of male/male slash take on 50 Shades of Grey. I admittedly tempted by it. Curious if there is one that is male/male version of Paper Princess?
As an aside, my parents were watching the old flick "Summer of 42" a while back, which was based on the book of the same name, and remade at one point. In fact the Buffy episode "Him" even referenced it. And my father said, as an aside to my mother, "I'd forgotten how scary teenage boys are at that age. All raging hormones."There's apparently a funny scene in the movie theater, where a boy is fondling the girl's elbow, and he thinks it is her boob, but in reality it's just her elbow. And the other boy notices him doing it as does the other girl. But his girl doesn't mind. LOL!
The difficulty with the New Adult genre, is the writers don't understand men or appreciate them, the male characters are sort of tropes or stock. They don't resemble any men or boys that I've known or met. Although to be fair, neither go the women.
Historicals, weirdly, are a tad more realistic, so too were the boddice ripper contempories of the 70s. These...I find rather hard to believe.
Anyhow..as a result I don't know if I like Prachett. I've only tried three books that he wrote. One - I loved, and remember fairly well, one disappointed me, and one just could not finish (which was a shame because it was a gift from a dear friend at the time, who thought I'd love it. I had to side-step that with her.) Sort of like Opera, I don't know if I like Opera -- only really seen Carmen, listened to some on CD (high soprano, doesn't do a lot for me -- my parents love it and played it constantly when I visited for a while there), parts of a comic opera, and listened to Mozart (I love listening to Mozart, how can you not?). Should try the city Opera at some point, be warned not to try the Met, it's pricey and not comfortable.
I do however love Gilbret & Sullivan Operettas...I've seen every single one in the space of a month on VHS, plus two performed by a G&S troop. We did the Mikado in high school (I was on the makeup crew, which was fun. As a result, I saw the Mikado a million times and almost have it memorized. I adored it.) See, that's interesting -- because G&S is pure satire and parody, yet I find it hilarious and loved it. (Hmmm, haven't seen it in a while though...so it is possible my tastes changed).
I don't know if I like Roger Zelzany either, just that I could not finish "Lord of Light" but that means nothing. It's possible I'd like another one of his books?
Too many books, too little time. Which makes me wonder why I am writing three at the moment. Oh that's right, because no one else has written them and I want to read those stories.
2.) Romance Genre has a frigging lot of sub-genres, some favorable, some....that ahem give it a bad name and make me wonder about people. This is unfortunately about the latter...and yes, I've read a lot of it, so I feel qualified to rant about it for a bit. (I only feel qualified to rant and rip apart things that I've experienced and read. Not that that always stops me...unfortunately, and much to be my own chagrin, but still.)
Was wandering about on Amazon during work, and Amazon being Amazon decided to rec Paper Princess by someone named Erin Watt..who is an erotica writer, writing a YA romance novel or at least this is marketed as a YA. I think Amazon rec'd it because I'd read Royally Matched and Royally Screwed and this story appeared to be in the same vein? Who knows? Amazon can't figure me out any longer -- it's just throwing everything at me including the kitchen sink.
Anyhow the title perked my interest. So I checked it out. And...I think YA may be the wrong subgenre for it? The marketing blurb is rather amusing.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BOOK
Q: Is this really a YA?
We recommend this for young adult readers, age 17 and up. We think it’s a book that will appeal to older teens and those adults who are in touch with their inner teen, like us.
Uhm, hate to break this to you, but that isn't "Young Adult", young adult is teens, between 14-18 usually. (ie. Twilight, The Hunger Games, Maze). 17 and up is New Adult - basically college kids. Post-high school age readers. (ie. 50 Shades of Grey, CrossFire, Colleen Hoover's books, Beautiful Disaster, etc.)
New Adult often syncs into the Billionaire Boys Club romances -- which is basically 50 Shades of Grey erotica Cinderella fantasies. Think Cinderella, except her Prince is into BDSM or rough sex. But not always does it sync into this ...sometimes it's more along the lines of Colleen Hoover and Jamie McGuire novels which is melodramatic teen sex romances. They are either in college, high school, or somewhere in between...having lots of forbidden elicit sex. The reason the writer goes younger -- is the want the virgin and the badboy trope or in some scenarios the naughty girl/bad boy trope. But unless the girl is 17-22, you can't really make it a big deal that she's having sex in contemporary romance novels.
Our society for some reason or other assumes that EVERYONE has had sex and lots of it by the age of 30, actually in romance novels and discussion boards, it appears to be 18. People were very upset that the lead character in a recent popular erotic novel had not had any sex and was 25, because that was far too old for their delicate sensibilities for someone to lose their virginity. This isn't true by the way. In fact nothing could be further from the truth. But people are so uptight and have such an inferiority/superiority complex regarding their sexual habits/history and others that they can't handle the mere concept that not everyone has the same sexual history that they do or has done the same things or is remotely interested in the same way or turned on in the same way. Because oh dear, if they aren't, what is wrong with me?? Sigh. If a lot of people haven't had sex by 25 or 30, and they have, then they get upset. So of course it's the opposite. If you haven't had sex by that time, obviously something is wrong with you -- they think. (There isn't. There is NOTHING wrong with you if you have not had sex. Despite what our media and culture states - sex does not necessarily equal happiness or health. It's not a prerequisite. And it is NOT the same for everyone. We are not a one size fits all society, regardless of what our television writers, novelists, etc think and tell you.) This is all very annoying. What one does, is, feels, or experiences sexually is private, personal thing, unique to them, end of story. We really do need to stop judging ourselves and each other regarding sex. We'll all be much happier if we did.
Examples of what I'm talking about:
* I actually had a friend read a story of mine, in which the lead character was 25-26 years of age and a virgin. She said it was unrealistic and no one would buy the story. The friend had had a lot of sex by that stage so clearly everyone else had too. Anything else was unrealistic and not believable because it did not relate her experience. (Weird, I thought we were supposed to dip into another's experience reading a book, not a reflection and/or validation of our own. And how sad is it that we as a society require that? )
* Another friend told me that the Gilmore Girls was unrealistic in regards to Rory Gilmore, because she didn't lose her virginity by her freshman year of college, because obviously everyone did. (Again my friend needed her own experience validated. I don't know why. Was she embarrassed about it? Did she judge herself harshly for some reason, and so judged everyone who didn't have that experience? There's nothing wrong with losing your virginity during your freshman year, unless of course it's date rape -- which unfortunately was how a lot of freshman girls lost theirs. Hence the shame factor. They got drunk, ended up in a guy's dorm room, heavy petting ensued, they vaguely remember trying to stop it/saying no/pushing him away, but he won't because he's drunk too, but not drunk enough not to get it up...and hello, date rape, but it's impossible to prove and they aren't sure it is date rape. And the guy's boasting, and the gal feels dumb as shit and does the walk of shame home. Ugh. I lost count of the number of friends who told me this story somewhat shamefaced in college. And yes, they were date-raped. And yes, the guy is responsible. And yes, if you are that guy? You deserve whatever karmic hell came at you years later. Why? Because when someone tells you to stop or tries to stop you, you fucking ass stop. Personally? I'd have kicked the guy in balls, hard, repeatedly. Ladies, if a guy date rapes you? Kick him in the balls, do it three times, hard. Make sure he's on the floor screaming and holding those unmentionables. All rapists should be kicked three times a day in the balls for a year.)
* And I remember reading a post online years ago by a twenty-something music promoter who said she'd finally had sex and was now a "woman" because it wasn't until she'd had sexual intercourse with a man that she could truly become a woman. She was but a girl before then.
* And...I'm not done. There was a fanfic writer, once, who stated that bad sex scenes in fanfic were obviously written by people who had never had sex and she felt very sorry for them, because she had a ton of it. (Honey, I remember thinking at the time, hate to break it to you but you can't tell if a person has had sex or not by reading fanfic. Also, it's not the lack of sexual experience, it's the lack of knowledge of human anatomy, and you yourself apparently have that problem. Because I'm sorry, unless you are a professional contornist, that position just isn't anatomically possible. Pick up an anatomy book. Pronto. Seriously, a lot of fanfic writers clearly got bored of their sex scenes and decided to come up with...one's that defy logic. I get that Buffy is a vampire slayer and Spike is a vampire -- but they aren't members of cirque de soleil, at least I checked. And ow. Just ow.) Sigh.
See? Evidence right there that our society is insecure about sex - their own, others, how others view them, etc. Also, oddly obsessed with it. We are. It's hilarious if you think about it. Every situation comedy on television, including the family ones, is obsessed with sex.
All you have to do is look at how we are handling gender and LGBTQIA issues to see the depth of the problem. L (Lesbian) G (Gay), B (Bisexual) T (Transgender) Q (Queer) I (Intersex) A (Asexual or Ally) or so I'm told by the internet. There's a Lingo Bingo night at my church to familarise myself with it if I'm so inclined. Personally, I think people care way too much about how we each identify ourselves and what we're all doing behind closed doors for our own good.
Why does it matter when someone else has it? How they have it? If they have it? Who they choose to do it with? What they fantasize? As long as it is consential, no rape, no sexual violence, I don't see an issue.)
Enuf of the rant.
Q: Is there a cliffhanger? I’ve heard there’s an awful cliffhanger! Why’d you write a cliffhanger?
We promise that we didn’t set out to write a cliffhanger, but Paper Princess does end in one. The good news is that the next book is up for pre-sale and it will be released July 25, 2016.
Sigh. According to the reviews there is an awful cliffhanger, which appears to be the routine in New Adult romance novels. You only get the crazy cliffhangers in the New Adult and sometimes the Young Adult contemporary. You don't get them in the historical romances, the adult contemporary romances, just the frigging YA and New Adult for some reason. And they don't help the story. If anything they stretch it too thin.
So, yes, you silly marketing people, you did intend to write an awful cliffhanger. Who do you think you are fooling? You did it so you could sell two books not just one, possibly even a series of books -- because hello, we have six boys, which lends itself to a series...it just writes itself.
I despise the New Adult genre.
It's taken the place of the 1970s/1990s boddice ripper genre. Except that genre was better written -- the characters, plot and world far more developed. Less sex. More character. If you want to read a good smutty, nasty little novel -- go read Rosemary Rodgers "The Crowd Pleasers" or "Love Play" or "The Insiders" -- these were trashy contemporary romance novels with kinky sex and bad boy men, and lots of rough sex bordering on rape, but not quite. (Which was actually my main problem with them -- sex in a lot of the boddice ripper contemporaries was in anger or a power-play between the characters and bordered on rape. It was a topic women felt they needed to explore in depth -- particularly during a time period where female sexuality was so controversial. You really do need to understand the context of the time period -- women were in some respects more confined than they are now.) I read the Crowd Pleasers when I was a teenager, because my mother had it, hidden in her bookshelves, top shelf. (I was industrious). So I'm amused by the ladies on Amazon whinging about impressionable teens reading this book. I read Rosemary Rodgers and Harold Robbins, who admittedly were better writers, but far smuttier. Not to mention more honest about it, since their characters were in their 20s and 30s, not teens. (And I survived. I discussed them with my Mom, it didn't twist me or anything.)
Regarding historical romance novels, if you want to avoid the "boddice ripper" or "rape as seduction" stories, just don't read any historical romances published prior to 2010. Apparently 2010 is the cut off? Or 2007? Somewhere in there. That's when the New Adult took over the boddice ripper category, and the historicals became a bit more...palpable. Yes, there's sex, but it's nice sex and the guys are nice for the most part.
You also might want to avoid Judith McNaught, Rosemary Rodgers, Fern Michaels, Kathleen Woodliss, and I can't remember the others.
Anyhow this particular story (Paper Princess) is apparently about a teenage girl, who has recently turned 17, in her junior or senior year of high school. (I thought people graduated at 17? It's admittedly been awhile. My brother graduated before he turned 18. I think I graduated after just turning 18. We were spring birthdays. He graduated at mid-term.] Anyhow, the girl in question, has lost her mother to cancer. To pay the bills she's working in strip joint, because apparently no one can hire her to wait tables? Nor does the owner care that she's underage, working in a bar, and if they catch him, he loses his license and goes to jail? Her dad is nowhere to be found and known to her as the sperm doner, But not so fast, in reality he was a billionaire playboy, who gets upset when he finds out he has a daughter and means to do right by her, but alas before he can dies tragically in a plane crash. So he somehow, prior to the plane crash, convinced his best friend and business partner, Callum Royal to become his daughter's legal guardian and take her in, until she comes of age. (She's 17 and been working in a strip joint and pays rent on an apartment.) He agrees, knowing nothing about her. And shows up at her school with the paperwork. She thinks he's a perv, takes off, and hunts a higher paying job to get away from said perv...the higher paying job is stripping naked at another strip joint -- an older one. (Seriously?) whose owner has been pushing her to do. (This happens within the first five pages of the sample I read.)Before she was just "pole dancing" apparently. Anyhow, turns out the legal guardian has a bunch of boys, all big, strapping, muscular lads, who go to a prep school and screw the girls there. Literally, not figuratively. And the nastiest of the bunch is "Reed" who is the wounded bad boy that lost his mom. He goes after the adopted princess, after the guardian hog-ties her and brings her into his abode. They have "ust" and finally rough sex..plus date rape in there somewhere...or attempted date rape..according to the reviews.
And...it was marketed as Young Adult. I think whoever marketed this screwed up. It screams New Adult. And it has all the nasty cliches from that genre. I get the fantasy. A lot of people have wicked fantasies. Don't judge them. I'm sure you have wicked fantasies too. We really don't need to discuss them. But it does annoy me a little that these wicked books get as many five star reviews on Good Reads and Amazon and make a ton of money...when in the end, all they are really is wicked fantasy porn with a bit of plot. Plus, you can sort of get the same thing for free at fanfic sites and erotica sites, just saying.
But New Adult is a legitimate subgenre of romance, and I think it does say something about how we view gender, sex, ourselves and why Trump is President. There's this weird ass ingrained take on gender roles in our culture and sex. It's rather misogynistic and a little misanthropic, if you think about it. Humans can be self-hating bastards.
What's interesting? Is I've come across a few male/male slash contemporary romance novels that play with the same New Adult Tropes...there's one entitled "Bagged by a Billionaire - Arden #1" -- sort of male/male slash take on 50 Shades of Grey. I admittedly tempted by it. Curious if there is one that is male/male version of Paper Princess?
As an aside, my parents were watching the old flick "Summer of 42" a while back, which was based on the book of the same name, and remade at one point. In fact the Buffy episode "Him" even referenced it. And my father said, as an aside to my mother, "I'd forgotten how scary teenage boys are at that age. All raging hormones."There's apparently a funny scene in the movie theater, where a boy is fondling the girl's elbow, and he thinks it is her boob, but in reality it's just her elbow. And the other boy notices him doing it as does the other girl. But his girl doesn't mind. LOL!
The difficulty with the New Adult genre, is the writers don't understand men or appreciate them, the male characters are sort of tropes or stock. They don't resemble any men or boys that I've known or met. Although to be fair, neither go the women.
Historicals, weirdly, are a tad more realistic, so too were the boddice ripper contempories of the 70s. These...I find rather hard to believe.