![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Wed Reading Meme....
Dec. 10th, 2014 09:40 pmReading reviews on smartbitches, which for some reason or other, is currently obsessed with contemporary romance novels - I came to the realization that the contemporary romance novels do little for me. I do not like them, Sam I am, I do not like contemporary romances...
Trying to figure out why. The sex certainly tends to be ahem, more inventive...or rather at times, somewhat unbelievable unless both characters are professional acrobats or cortionists working for Cirque du Soliel. Mainly because let's face it - reading sex scenes can get repetitive fast. I do at times wonder if the writer has bought a copy of the Karma Sutra or Joy of Sex, the illustrated version, prior to writing the book. (I had a copy courtesy of a college boyfriend, (the Joy of Sex not the Karma Sutra) but made the mistake of leaving it at my parents house after I moved to NYC - and I think they got rid of it, damn them.) OR rather maybe they should buy a copy of it?
But the characters are somewhat bland. The writers clearly know nothing of the professions of which they are writing...or nothing outside what they see on television. Nora Roberts to be fair does extensive research - which may be why her novels put me to sleep - it's 98% research, with the characters somewhat stock. There was one about a female fire jumper, and the only thing interesting about it was the wild-fire jumping - but turns out there's not a heck of a lot to fire jumping. Everything else was stock characters and paint-by-numbers plotting. I was bored.
Also, I don't find tattoo artists (having met them), military guys (ditto), wrestlers,
bikers, and lawyers all that interesting. The other popular trope in this category is
billionaire businessmen, specifically in the hotel trade. For some reason hotels or
sports are big. No one, as far as I can tell, has gone off and done something innovative with the format. It's either some girl in trouble, and she hires a body guard, or an FBI agent or an undercover marshal comes to help. Bored now. The whole thing is the dude saving the gal, and having sex, and them fighting - because she doesn't think she needs to be saved or require his help. By the end of it, I want to smack her spoiled butt and I feel sorry for him. Contemporary romance novelists for reasons that escape me seem to be a wee bit misogynistic. There's also a lot of sexual abuse in them - either past history, or present. It's an odd genre.
Historicals...on the other hand, have a bit more to them. They tend to focus more on class as well as gender politics. And a lot on social caste system and political intrigue. Starting to despise the British aristocracy...though. It deserved to come tumbling down. Also, weirdly, the female character is stronger and in more control. In the last few that I've read, she sort of saves him or they save each other. It's weird, but the historical romance novel is more feminist than the contemporary, you'd think it would be the opposite.
What can I say? This is an odd genre. And the readers are bizarrely judgmental of the fictional characters, each other, and the writers. For some reason they get really, and I do mean REALLY, upset if a hero or heroine (doesn't matter which, equal opportunity on this front) cheats on their spouse or is unfaithful. Doesn't matter why they are unfaithful, if they are - it makes them crazy. This threw me in the Buffy fandom as well - more people were upset with Anya and Spike for sleeping together than well anything else they did. Considering neither was currently with either Xander or Buffy at the time...this was rather perplexing. People bewilder me.
I'm guessing that their significant others probably cheated on them at some point or they are products of bad divorces and "projecting their issues on the characters"?
Then again, I don't know. Tempting as it is to judge others for their opinions, it bears keeping in mind that in of itself is a judgement.
What I like about fiction and the reason I read it - is it puts me in a point of view other than my own. I get to walk a mile or two in another person's shoes, and I mean their exact shoes. And see the world from their angle. This only works if you suspend your judgement and let the character tell you their story - and well listen. If you are busy judging the character, you aren't "listening" and you miss out on the story.
You leave the novel unchanged, and you might as well have never bothered. The whole experience may well have been a colossal waste of time. OR not. I admittedly read Ian McEwan's Atonement in this frame of mind. I had an extreme negative reaction to the characters and writing style. It's one of those books I'd have given up on entirely if it weren't for the book club that I was reading it for at the time. The book still haunts me, and I find myself flipping over in my head exactly why I hated the protagonist as much as I did. I think it may have to do with my own ethical stance on writing - that a writer should not exploit the lives of others for their own gain. Of course all writers use what they know, people, places etc...but we need to be careful regarding our use. Careful not to paint real people and real events in a manner that exploits them or changes them from their own reality. In Atonement, the protagonist rewrote her history to paint herself as a hero and the other characters in a less than savory light - not honoring their sacrifices, pain, and their journey. The book of course was about the ethics of doing that. I just found it painful to read, because as a writer - it is something I feel strongly about not doing. And perhaps fear doing. This may explain why readers have negative reactions to stories and characters - it hits a raw wound that they would rather not examine or focus too closely on.
1. What I've just finished reading?
Meredith Duran's - "Written on Your Skin" - which was rather interesting. Both characters were strong, and there was more going on than usual. The writer still focused far too much on the romantic angst and sex...but hey, that's the genre.
2. what I'm reading now?
Never Judge a Lady by Her Cover by Sarah McLean - which has gotten mixed reviews. People either love it or hate it. Depends on how worried you are about consistency, plot, and plausibility, I suspect. What's fascinates me is that so many romance genre readers do worry about these things... which means that the genre, like all genres is a mixed bag. McLean has won a lot of acclaim and awards, she's also a big seller in the field. I read the first novel in the previous series - "Nine Rules to Win a Rake" or something along those lines. She is creative with her titles, I will give her that. And her heroines tend to be tough and rather feisty. The villains moustache twirling eviiil (annoying but what can you do, it's typical of most genre writers). And the heroes massive, attractive, and controlling - or rather they try to be and keep failing miserably. The novel that sort of sets up this one - is "Eleven Scandals to Start to Win a Duke's Heart" or something along those lines. The Duke in question is the one who funds the heroine in Never Judge a Lady by Her Cover's gambling enterprise. What's odd about this - is the description of said Duke - is a man who hates scandal, is a bit of a stick in the mud, and a tad chauvinistic. Unless he does a 180 degree turn, the idea that he of all people is bank-rolling his sister's gambling den and allowing her to pretend to be a Madame in it, while he raises her daughter in the country - makes no sense whatsoever, and explains why a lot of the readers had troubles with the series. Romance novelists often play loose and fast with the rules, or so I've discovered.
3. What I'll be reading next?
I have no shame. The one that set this one up - Eleven Scandals to Win a Duke's Heart - mainly because the negative reviews made me curious. Often a negative review will convince me to read a book, while a positive review will turn me off of it.
This alas, is what happened with Twilight, Me Before You, 50 Shades and Gone Girl. The positive reviews of Gone Girl and Twilight - made me want to burn the books, and never read them. While the negative reviews of 50 Shades and Me Before You sparked my curiousity. I really need to stop reading reviews on Good Reads and Amazon.
Trying to figure out why. The sex certainly tends to be ahem, more inventive...or rather at times, somewhat unbelievable unless both characters are professional acrobats or cortionists working for Cirque du Soliel. Mainly because let's face it - reading sex scenes can get repetitive fast. I do at times wonder if the writer has bought a copy of the Karma Sutra or Joy of Sex, the illustrated version, prior to writing the book. (I had a copy courtesy of a college boyfriend, (the Joy of Sex not the Karma Sutra) but made the mistake of leaving it at my parents house after I moved to NYC - and I think they got rid of it, damn them.) OR rather maybe they should buy a copy of it?
But the characters are somewhat bland. The writers clearly know nothing of the professions of which they are writing...or nothing outside what they see on television. Nora Roberts to be fair does extensive research - which may be why her novels put me to sleep - it's 98% research, with the characters somewhat stock. There was one about a female fire jumper, and the only thing interesting about it was the wild-fire jumping - but turns out there's not a heck of a lot to fire jumping. Everything else was stock characters and paint-by-numbers plotting. I was bored.
Also, I don't find tattoo artists (having met them), military guys (ditto), wrestlers,
bikers, and lawyers all that interesting. The other popular trope in this category is
billionaire businessmen, specifically in the hotel trade. For some reason hotels or
sports are big. No one, as far as I can tell, has gone off and done something innovative with the format. It's either some girl in trouble, and she hires a body guard, or an FBI agent or an undercover marshal comes to help. Bored now. The whole thing is the dude saving the gal, and having sex, and them fighting - because she doesn't think she needs to be saved or require his help. By the end of it, I want to smack her spoiled butt and I feel sorry for him. Contemporary romance novelists for reasons that escape me seem to be a wee bit misogynistic. There's also a lot of sexual abuse in them - either past history, or present. It's an odd genre.
Historicals...on the other hand, have a bit more to them. They tend to focus more on class as well as gender politics. And a lot on social caste system and political intrigue. Starting to despise the British aristocracy...though. It deserved to come tumbling down. Also, weirdly, the female character is stronger and in more control. In the last few that I've read, she sort of saves him or they save each other. It's weird, but the historical romance novel is more feminist than the contemporary, you'd think it would be the opposite.
What can I say? This is an odd genre. And the readers are bizarrely judgmental of the fictional characters, each other, and the writers. For some reason they get really, and I do mean REALLY, upset if a hero or heroine (doesn't matter which, equal opportunity on this front) cheats on their spouse or is unfaithful. Doesn't matter why they are unfaithful, if they are - it makes them crazy. This threw me in the Buffy fandom as well - more people were upset with Anya and Spike for sleeping together than well anything else they did. Considering neither was currently with either Xander or Buffy at the time...this was rather perplexing. People bewilder me.
I'm guessing that their significant others probably cheated on them at some point or they are products of bad divorces and "projecting their issues on the characters"?
Then again, I don't know. Tempting as it is to judge others for their opinions, it bears keeping in mind that in of itself is a judgement.
What I like about fiction and the reason I read it - is it puts me in a point of view other than my own. I get to walk a mile or two in another person's shoes, and I mean their exact shoes. And see the world from their angle. This only works if you suspend your judgement and let the character tell you their story - and well listen. If you are busy judging the character, you aren't "listening" and you miss out on the story.
You leave the novel unchanged, and you might as well have never bothered. The whole experience may well have been a colossal waste of time. OR not. I admittedly read Ian McEwan's Atonement in this frame of mind. I had an extreme negative reaction to the characters and writing style. It's one of those books I'd have given up on entirely if it weren't for the book club that I was reading it for at the time. The book still haunts me, and I find myself flipping over in my head exactly why I hated the protagonist as much as I did. I think it may have to do with my own ethical stance on writing - that a writer should not exploit the lives of others for their own gain. Of course all writers use what they know, people, places etc...but we need to be careful regarding our use. Careful not to paint real people and real events in a manner that exploits them or changes them from their own reality. In Atonement, the protagonist rewrote her history to paint herself as a hero and the other characters in a less than savory light - not honoring their sacrifices, pain, and their journey. The book of course was about the ethics of doing that. I just found it painful to read, because as a writer - it is something I feel strongly about not doing. And perhaps fear doing. This may explain why readers have negative reactions to stories and characters - it hits a raw wound that they would rather not examine or focus too closely on.
1. What I've just finished reading?
Meredith Duran's - "Written on Your Skin" - which was rather interesting. Both characters were strong, and there was more going on than usual. The writer still focused far too much on the romantic angst and sex...but hey, that's the genre.
2. what I'm reading now?
Never Judge a Lady by Her Cover by Sarah McLean - which has gotten mixed reviews. People either love it or hate it. Depends on how worried you are about consistency, plot, and plausibility, I suspect. What's fascinates me is that so many romance genre readers do worry about these things... which means that the genre, like all genres is a mixed bag. McLean has won a lot of acclaim and awards, she's also a big seller in the field. I read the first novel in the previous series - "Nine Rules to Win a Rake" or something along those lines. She is creative with her titles, I will give her that. And her heroines tend to be tough and rather feisty. The villains moustache twirling eviiil (annoying but what can you do, it's typical of most genre writers). And the heroes massive, attractive, and controlling - or rather they try to be and keep failing miserably. The novel that sort of sets up this one - is "Eleven Scandals to Start to Win a Duke's Heart" or something along those lines. The Duke in question is the one who funds the heroine in Never Judge a Lady by Her Cover's gambling enterprise. What's odd about this - is the description of said Duke - is a man who hates scandal, is a bit of a stick in the mud, and a tad chauvinistic. Unless he does a 180 degree turn, the idea that he of all people is bank-rolling his sister's gambling den and allowing her to pretend to be a Madame in it, while he raises her daughter in the country - makes no sense whatsoever, and explains why a lot of the readers had troubles with the series. Romance novelists often play loose and fast with the rules, or so I've discovered.
3. What I'll be reading next?
I have no shame. The one that set this one up - Eleven Scandals to Win a Duke's Heart - mainly because the negative reviews made me curious. Often a negative review will convince me to read a book, while a positive review will turn me off of it.
This alas, is what happened with Twilight, Me Before You, 50 Shades and Gone Girl. The positive reviews of Gone Girl and Twilight - made me want to burn the books, and never read them. While the negative reviews of 50 Shades and Me Before You sparked my curiousity. I really need to stop reading reviews on Good Reads and Amazon.