I have a confession to make.
Feb. 1st, 2007 05:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
velvetpageI read romance novels.
There, I've said it. *turns in literary geek card*
Seriously, though. Some of it is total tripe; I rarely read those. Some of it is less awful; I got my fill of those a few years ago, and rarely read them now. Some romance authors get into plot and/or character ruts, like a role-player who only ever plays clerics, and I've gotten quite sick of some of those. (Nora Roberts is the worst offender - if she writes one more trilogy with the tough-as-nails sister, the abused sister, and the feminine mystique sister, all of whom find their ideal matches while solving whatever mystery or killing whatever bad guy she presents for them, I think I'll vomit. I certainly won't buy it.)
No, when I read romance novels, I try to pick the good ones. These are the ones with characters who are distinguished from each other by more than just their titles; the ones with good historical research to back them up; the ones that explore the darker sides of human nature, and the ability of humanity to overcome them; in short, the ones with substance.
My favourite authors are Mary Jo Putney and Joan Wolf. When these two write Regency romances (every romance author has to put in their time writing Regencies; Britain was at war, so there are dashing military heroes, titles, and skimpy dresses without big bustles, all in the same era) they set them in the midst of the Battle of Waterloo, or as spies during the Congress of Vienna or the Treaty of Paris the following year, or in small principalities that are rebuilding after Napoleon's occupation. When they write about India, they do their research and go in-depth about the Silk Road, the Hindu and Muslim principalities that dotted India at the time, the customs of which they would run afoul, the plots that could, and in some cases did, lead to continent-wide conflagrations - the depth of historical research makes them intriguing even without the steamy sex scenes. (I like the one with the forty yards of sheer sari silk, myself. . .) Did you know that the reason for the revolts in India in the middle of the nineteenth century, that led to huge massacres of anyone British, were caused because of a rumour that their cartridges of ammunition contained both beef and pork tallow, making them unclean to Hindu and Muslim alike? After reading that in Putney's books about India, I checked it. Some history books state it as fact, some as rumour, but it's there and it was indeed a factor.
What Joan Wolf doesn't know about horses and classical riding techniques probably isn't worth knowing. At least three of her books have that as a central theme, and two more have it as an aside. Little details, like the British refusing to train women in the classical riding style, while European females were engaging in real training and becoming experts in those styles, are very intriguing to me.
And then of course, there's the steamy sex scenes. They're like a granola bar. Plenty of healthy cereal, fruit filling, and other good-for-you stuff - but you know you really eat them for the chocolate chips.
To make a good author even better, Putney has recently started doing historical fantasy - the kind where magic is overlaid into an actual historical setting. One of these was about the return of Bonnie Prince Charlie, and the way a weather mage could have played a role in his march down into England - and back up into Scotland. I've just picked up the next of this series, and I'm about to start it.
Which means this particular confession is now over. I'm about to read about a young lord who happens to be a mage, who meets a young lady while trying to escape from some hunters. He happens to be wearing the form of a unicorn at the time.
Brain candy? Definitely. But if you're going to read brain candy, you might as well go for the Godiva.
EDIT: American sword-and-sorcery fantasy authors shouldn't try to set books in Great Britain. They might do all right for an all-American audience, but the rest of us are going to catch the mistakes. For example - Mrs. Lackey, you write very good fantasy, but your history needs a refresher course. Queen Victoria's father never sat on the throne; he died before she was born, and she took the throne from one of her uncles, William, I believe. He's the one who sired a dozen kids on his French mistress, but when married to his nice little German princess, couldn't get an heir. Anyhow. Good book - not enough research.
There, I've said it. *turns in literary geek card*
Seriously, though. Some of it is total tripe; I rarely read those. Some of it is less awful; I got my fill of those a few years ago, and rarely read them now. Some romance authors get into plot and/or character ruts, like a role-player who only ever plays clerics, and I've gotten quite sick of some of those. (Nora Roberts is the worst offender - if she writes one more trilogy with the tough-as-nails sister, the abused sister, and the feminine mystique sister, all of whom find their ideal matches while solving whatever mystery or killing whatever bad guy she presents for them, I think I'll vomit. I certainly won't buy it.)
No, when I read romance novels, I try to pick the good ones. These are the ones with characters who are distinguished from each other by more than just their titles; the ones with good historical research to back them up; the ones that explore the darker sides of human nature, and the ability of humanity to overcome them; in short, the ones with substance.
My favourite authors are Mary Jo Putney and Joan Wolf. When these two write Regency romances (every romance author has to put in their time writing Regencies; Britain was at war, so there are dashing military heroes, titles, and skimpy dresses without big bustles, all in the same era) they set them in the midst of the Battle of Waterloo, or as spies during the Congress of Vienna or the Treaty of Paris the following year, or in small principalities that are rebuilding after Napoleon's occupation. When they write about India, they do their research and go in-depth about the Silk Road, the Hindu and Muslim principalities that dotted India at the time, the customs of which they would run afoul, the plots that could, and in some cases did, lead to continent-wide conflagrations - the depth of historical research makes them intriguing even without the steamy sex scenes. (I like the one with the forty yards of sheer sari silk, myself. . .) Did you know that the reason for the revolts in India in the middle of the nineteenth century, that led to huge massacres of anyone British, were caused because of a rumour that their cartridges of ammunition contained both beef and pork tallow, making them unclean to Hindu and Muslim alike? After reading that in Putney's books about India, I checked it. Some history books state it as fact, some as rumour, but it's there and it was indeed a factor.
What Joan Wolf doesn't know about horses and classical riding techniques probably isn't worth knowing. At least three of her books have that as a central theme, and two more have it as an aside. Little details, like the British refusing to train women in the classical riding style, while European females were engaging in real training and becoming experts in those styles, are very intriguing to me.
And then of course, there's the steamy sex scenes. They're like a granola bar. Plenty of healthy cereal, fruit filling, and other good-for-you stuff - but you know you really eat them for the chocolate chips.
To make a good author even better, Putney has recently started doing historical fantasy - the kind where magic is overlaid into an actual historical setting. One of these was about the return of Bonnie Prince Charlie, and the way a weather mage could have played a role in his march down into England - and back up into Scotland. I've just picked up the next of this series, and I'm about to start it.
Which means this particular confession is now over. I'm about to read about a young lord who happens to be a mage, who meets a young lady while trying to escape from some hunters. He happens to be wearing the form of a unicorn at the time.
Brain candy? Definitely. But if you're going to read brain candy, you might as well go for the Godiva.
EDIT: American sword-and-sorcery fantasy authors shouldn't try to set books in Great Britain. They might do all right for an all-American audience, but the rest of us are going to catch the mistakes. For example - Mrs. Lackey, you write very good fantasy, but your history needs a refresher course. Queen Victoria's father never sat on the throne; he died before she was born, and she took the throne from one of her uncles, William, I believe. He's the one who sired a dozen kids on his French mistress, but when married to his nice little German princess, couldn't get an heir. Anyhow. Good book - not enough research.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
My Confession...
Date: 2007-02-02 01:10 am (UTC)I haven't had a romance novel binge in quite some time because I got fed up with it. It was largely to do with unrequited love from SO#1. The syrupy happy endings just made me angry and frustrated.
Re: My Confession...
Date: 2007-02-02 01:43 am (UTC)Re: My Confession...
Date: 2007-02-02 02:07 am (UTC)I am a sucker for a historical romance, especially. Haha!
Re: My Confession...
Date: 2007-02-02 02:13 am (UTC)Re: My Confession...
Date: 2007-02-02 02:16 am (UTC)