I write romance in most sub-genres–historical, contemporary, futuristic, paranormal, and sci-fi (all erotic). So far in my career I’ve been able to write whatever I want. I hope to always be able to do that, but I doubt that will be the case. There are fences around authors, boundaries we can’t cross. I’m starting to see them as I feel my way around the perimeter.
Don’t readers want something different?
Yes, I hear they do. But even then, “different†has to stay within the boundaries.
So many times I’ll see a storyline and wonder why the author didn’t take it further. The last time it happened, I decided to write the premise differently. But I was urged to rein back by those who read it in its early stages. Romance readers won’t go for that. You can’t do it.
I wasn’t sure I believed them, but I made some alterations to make the piece more palatable (read: commercial/salable). It didn’t affect the story and I wasn’t attached to it. Still, I’m a gal who likes to take things outside the box. Later, while stopping by a blog I was directed to, I found a discussion between readers where some were quite adamant that certain things were simply unacceptable in romance. There are boundaries. Once the hero and heroine meet, certain things must NOT be done. (I bet you can think of a few things you won’t tolerate or don’t like in a romance after the H/h meet. Want to share? I’d love to hear them.)
Writers entering contests will tell you how their manuscript came back with notes about how they “couldn’t†(not “shouldn’tâ€) have a character say or do that (and the “that†varies.) A friend posted a blurb on a Yahoo loop and was emailed by a popular author who pointed out all the things she “couldn’t†do, but had done in her blurb. We’re not talking about the craft of writing, but about the storytelling and the “rulesâ€. She turned it in to her NY editor without the suggested changes, and the editor loved it.
As another friend of mine says, “Anything is possible with the right motivation.†I’ve always thought that. But I guess that’s not true. Apparently, some things can’t be done. Period. Because despite what is said about wanting new and different, it’s the readers’ old standards of romance that seem to set the boundaries. If we want to be swept away by a storyline we haven’t seen, we have to buy it when it hits the shelves. If the money is there, the publishers will follow.
I spoke with a reader the other day and confessed my worry that I would continue to write stories that need “reining in†and might alienate readers. She agreed that breaking too many rules coming out of the gate could have a negative effect. I’ve heard it said that romance novels are fantasy, but it seems the fantasy has a set screenplay.
So when I see complaints about how publishers are releasing a parade of the same old thing, and how readers are finding less and less keeper books, and reading slumps are coming more often, and readers are afraid to try new authors… I can’t help but wonder if we’re the ones fencing the genre in. Us–the readers.
Is that a possibility?
No related posts.
Sylvia, I see your point because I hear a lot of those complaints myself from other readers. Another complaint is that many people don’t like it when their favorite historical author starts to write contemporaries, and this really bothers me. I believe an author should write whatever they want, whether it’s a murder mystery or a cookbook. Authors need to keep their creative juices flowing, too.
I don’t understand publishers. Tons of people complain about the saturation by one genre or another – doesn’t that tell them something? I would love to have a publisher explain this to me.
If I wasn’t looking for something different, something new, I would have never discovered Bad Boys Ahoy, or MaryJanice Davidson’s Undead series, or Shiloh Walker’s Hunters, all of which were wonderful books and I’m so glad I found them. Plus, I work at a B&N p/t, so I do have more of an opportunity to look at books, and I do make it a point to find brand new authors (first book) or new-to-me authors (6th or 20th book) on a regular basis, and still enjoy my auto-buy authors.
I do believe some readers fence themselves in for the very reasons you mentioned, and justifiably so when you only have so much of a budget to spend or so much time available to “escape”, but I don’t count myself as one of them.
Nothing bores me more than formulaic plots and cookie cutter characters — so I buck trends as both a reader and an author.
You’re absolutely right about supporting the efforts to break the chains. I’ll buy work (be it fiction or film) on that reason alone — just to send the message to those keeping score that I want more.
Hi, Sylvia–
Interesting article. The only hard and fast rule I have for the books I read is that I expect the H & H to be monogamous once they get together. Other than that, I’m open to new things. I don’t mind when historical authors write contemporaries, but I do mind when they STOP writing historicals to write contemporaries.
As an author, the rules can be constraining sometimes. In my first book, one of the characters is a street kid. As I wrote him, he had a potty mouth. My agent had me clean him up, and now he’s a G-rated potty mouth. Not quite the same, but we needed to do that to sell the book.
Maybe there are a few basic “commandments” that readers expect not to be broken, but other than that, they’re open to new things. I dunno …
Loved BAD BOYS AHOY, BTW.
Best,
Ann Christopher
I guess I also like that they be monogamous once they get together but I am open to the fact that, even if the hero is in love with the heroine, he thinks he isn’t good enough for him and he makes her leave for her own good then goes and sleeps with someone to try and forget her. I’ve no problem with this sort of thing so long as it’s well written and clear that he isn’t doing it just because and that he is in love with her. Other than that well, no violence on the hero’s part toward sthe heroine UNLESS it can be EXTREMELY well excused. Even then, it would have to be something minor. Nothing like rape or torture of some sort. I don’t think I could get to like a hero who enjoys doing these things.
Hi Sylvia!!!
I’m all for breaking rules, but there are boundaries no matter what you write. It really depends on what rules you break and why–does it advance the story? Does it make the story better? If it’s breaking rules for the sake of breaking them (shocking people) I don’t think it works as much as if you’re breaking rules for the story.
Take suspense/mysteries. Whether you’re writing cozies or hard-boiled detective books; serial killers or stalkers, there are two things you CAN NOT do and still make it. You can not kill a cat/dog on-scene. You can not kill a child on-scene. Period. They are fairly hard fast “rules.” I’m sure there are readers who aren’t bothered by it if it goes with the story, but the majority–i.e. the difference in numbers at the cash register–is huge. A major industry person told me that a person’s career was killed after a child’s murder in what turned out to be his last book.
I broke a lot of rules in my romantic suspense, like killing off a well-liked character. I got some flak from readers. But the sales were strong enough that MOST people liked the story. But I didn’t kill him off just to break rules. I killed him off because it was integral to the story. Without the murder, the entire book would have been different.
I think you’re lucky in erotic romance that you can push even more boundaries. I remember one book I wrote (absolutely loved) where my heroine was in bed with a man at the beginning of the story (she slept with two men, semi-off-scene, before meeting up with the hero). I had huge disparities in judging. Some judges hated her, said I “couldn’t” do this. Other judges loved her because they loved her character. It was the ONLY book that ever had a full request from an editor off a contest. (But, alas, it’s a different genre than what I sold so I probably won’t try to sell it for awhile.)
Anyway, sorry for this long post. I’m willing to put up with a lot of rule breaking in any genre, but every genre has rules that are there for a reason. In romance, you need an HEA. They don’t have to get married, they just need to be together at the end of the book. In a mystery, you need to learn whodunit and have the clues there (however subtle) otherwise the reader feels cheated. In erotic romance, you need hot sex
What a great point!
I find this really apparent within the books written by one author – they’ve followed a set of rules for each of their books, the exact same set. And it ends up turning into a read one, read them all type of thing.
There are several instances that can set me off a book – a cheating hero in a comtemporary book, historicals for some reason I can slide right over but not a present day hero. Heroines – no cheating period. Although it isn’t something I won’t tolerate, facial hair on a hero turns me off of him, I skip right by that part and imagine him clean shaven.
Dear Sylvia,
Great post, and it addresses questions on many minds.
I believe that, instead of rules, we should be talking about meeting readers’ expectations.
If the genre placement, the cover, the blurbs, the back cover teaser and the first pages promise me something — even if that something might break a few “rules” — then I am prepared as a reader and willing to endure close to anything as long as I’m TOLD A GREAT STORY.
I’ve said many times now that the guarantee of a happy ending within the romance genre makes it the PERFECT place to take characters — and readers — to hell and back. As a reader I feel safe because, since I picked the book from a romance shelf, I’m assured that it will all work out in the end. I’m a big fan of suspense and horror, but I have trouble letting down my guard and connecting with main characters because I’m not sure if they’ll die before or at the end.
When people talk about rules, I immediately bristle. But when we frame the conversation as an author’s responsibility to his or her readers, I am immediately and positively engaged.
I don’t understand publishers. Tons of people complain about the saturation by one genre or another – doesn’t that tell them something? I would love to have a publisher explain this to me.
I don’t know if you need a publisher to do that. Tons of people might complain about the saturation, but as long as any book with the word vampire in it instantly hits the USA Today list, they’ll keep buying ‘em.
I think this whole “monogamy after the H/h meet” is only a decade or so old. The big old historicals from the eighties had heroes that were sleeping around all the time.
I think this might be why a lot of people are turning to stories that aren’t romances but have romance in them — so they can be surprised when the love story veers from “the script.” When writing my book, which was the first novel I’d written that was not strictly a romance, I felt very freed by my ability to avoid certain romantic expectations.
Wonderful article, Sylvia!
And Joyce? I agree with you wholeheartedly. We just need to find another few thousand people who think like us.
I suspect I’m with Allison about rule-breaking.
I like authors who ‘write outside the box’, when the trip is authentic. Push the boundaries, break some rules, take the story deeper and farther — All that can make for a richer book. It crashes for me as a reader, however, when the characters go outside the box without authentic motivation. If I stop reading after a scene and think, “That made no sense”, or if I feel cheated because the character just veered off on a nonsense tangent.
I think it’s possible to keep it ‘real’ (Ack, I sound like Randy on American Idol) and still boldly go outside the box.
“She agreed that breaking too many rules coming out of the gate could have a negative effect.”
Then again, breaking too many rules could be the reason people clamor to pick up the next one. They know you’ll give them something different each time.
I didn’t realize that the HEA between the hero and heroine was so restrictive. If you don’t want to be bound by those restrictions, don’t market the book as a romance. If you are trying to get the romance crowd to buy your books then you have to be aware of the reader expectations and you, as an author, should anticipate those expectations.
As a reader, I find myself wondering why authors find this to be a challenge. Don’t write in the romance genre if you don’t want to be bound by the HEA rule. That seems quite simple to me.
Essentially, I hear you saying that you want your cake (the ability to write whatever you want) and to eat it to (the $$$ from romance readers). Authors can write whatever they want. There are plenty of books that sell just fine without a HEA between a hero and heroine. It’s just that in the romance market, a HEA is a must. Why else is it a romance?
I’m with Jane and Mary Stella. If a book is marketed as a romance, and the author writes it intending it to be a romance, then for better or worse, there are some conventions that have to be there.
Notably, the HEA. The whole *point* of romance is that they hero and heroine end up together and happy, or happy for now at least, right? There was just a post about how a lack of a HEA ruined the book for many readers. It’s just what we’ve come to expect from the genre. No matter how far the boundaries get pushed, I don’t think that’s going to change.
But, like Mary Stella said, the fact that the HEA *is* there guarantees that you can go as far as you want to go, as far as I’m concerned. Break the characters. Hurt them. I *love* to see characters -mess up-. That makes them real to me. And I can stand it because I know that the wrong will be righted, the misunderstanding will be explained and in the end, the characters will be happy.
Take me on the journey with them. Just don’t strand me.
If I wasn’t looking for something different, something new, I would have never discovered Bad Boys Ahoy, or MaryJanice Davidson’s Undead series, or Shiloh Walker’s Hunters, all of which were wonderful books and I’m so glad I found them.
Thank you, Stacy. I agree about MJ and Shiloh. I’m a fan of both.
Loved BAD BOYS AHOY, BTW.
Thank you, Ann!
I guess I also like that they be monogamous once they get together but I am open to the fact that, even if the hero is in love with the heroine, he thinks he isn’t good enough for him and he makes her leave for her own good then goes and sleeps with someone to try and forget her.
Hi, Mailyn!
Can the heroine do the same thing?
It really depends on what rules you break and why–does it advance the story? Does it make the story better?
How about making the characters better? Same thing in a way, but different, too. Perhaps the story would have been the same, regardless. But the characters would have been people we couldn’t call stereotypical.
If it’s breaking rules for the sake of breaking them (shocking people) I don’t think it works as much as if you’re breaking rules for the story
I agree, 100%!
awwww… thank you, Sylvia and Stacy
I think the restrictive thing about the HEA is that some people get an idea of WHAT the HEA is supposed to be. Some readers complain if the hero and heroine aren’t madly in love and setting up wedding plans by the end of the book. But it’s unrealistic in some stories… when the story takes place over a span of days or short weeks. They can make a commitment to each other and the HEA is there for me.
I’m one of the ones who write a variety of genres and while yes, I might get sort of sad if my fave author stopped writing in one of her genres, I wouldn’t expect her to continue just because that’s what she’s always written and what I expect from her. I don’t expect anything from my fave writers except for them to entertain me. That’s all I need.
Writers are people, too. They change just like everybody else and often the stories they have inside them can change as well.
For a historical romance writer, it’s entirely possible that historicals used to be natural for them and then they just weren’t… I’d rather read a book that flowed naturally for the writer than one she had to force. Usually, when it’s forced… it sucks.
My first books published were erotic romance and I still plan to continue erotic romance for a while, but I’ve said before, I don’t plan on writing erotic romance forever. It’s what holds my attention at that moment, but when that changes, I will not keep trying to force a story line/type that is no longer there.
It’s a selfish thing. What do I get for my £6.99?
One of my boundaries is torture: I find it very alienating in any genre. So if Ms. R. Writer sells a boundary-breaking superlative romance – which happens to include torture scenes – I’m not altruistic enough, nor rich enough, to buy it in the hope that great sales figures will lead to other boundary-breaking superlative romances being published.
It’s sort of like the evolutionary rule that no adaption, however beneficial it would be to the group, survives unless it benefits the individual. No matter how beneficial it might be for authors, or the publishing industry, I won’t spend money on a book unless it benefits me. The Selfish Reader.
[I know in my heart of hearts a biologist is about to post and tell me I've got that entirely wrong...]
It crashes for me as a reader, however, when the characters go outside the box without authentic motivation.
I think this is when the “rule-breaking” is done just for shock effect.
oh… lol…:mrgreen: Sylvia, I understand the fenced in part vvverrrryyy well…
Because I DO write such a wide variety, from contemp to suspense to paranormal to fantasy, both erotic and traditional romance, most of my readers aren’t surprised when a book comes out that’s different from the one I released a few months earlier.
But I do on occassion get an email wondering why I haven’t written another for this series or that series or why I’m not doing more of this genre. Simple answer, the story isn’t there yet. When it’s ready, I’ll write it. Try to force it and it may not ever come. That’s just the way it works for me.
As a reader, I find myself wondering why authors find this to be a challenge. Don’t write in the romance genre if you don’t want to be bound by the HEA rule. That seems quite simple to me.
I don’t know where the HEA tangent came into play here, since I never said anything about the HEA restricting my stories. I write purely romance. No hybrids. (not that I have a problem with hybrids, I just don’t write them.) It’s all romance, all the time in my stories. The entire reason any of my stories exist is to take two people from page one to HEA.
My post is about something different entirely. I could read a book where the heroine wasn’t faithful to the hero. The motivation would have to be right (for me), but it wouldn’t be an automatic wall-banger. Like Joyce said, because I know it’s a romance and we’re heading to HEA, I’m more than willing to take the author’s journey to get there.
I’m interested in reading RABBIT HEART, where the heroine is so insatiable in bed she wears out every man who sleeps with her…until he dies. Wow. Haven’t read one of those before. Is there a HEA? Appears to be, otherwise I wouldn’t buy it. I only read romance, and a romance to me requires a HEA.
There was just a post about how a lack of a HEA ruined the book for many readers.
I’m one of the readers who wouldn’t be pleased. The whole reason I read romance is to get that mushy *sigh* feeling at the end. I need to know that after all the grief I just went through with them, there’s joy and love ahead.
I guess it wasn’t clear what boundaries you are trying to get over. Is it just the cheating thing? Because the cheating thing happens in books alot and it is forgiven alot. IE., Derek Craven in Lisa Kleypas’ much lauded book, Dreaming of You. More recently, Lover Eternal by JR Ward featured a scene which many readers deemed as cheating but that hasn’t stopped Ward from being a bestseller.
I have read books with forced seductions, real rapes, children dying, etc. all in romance books from authors who are bestsellers. I think it is less about conventions and more about how an author writes the story. Remember Fallen from Grace by Laura Leone? Loved that book and it was tremendously well received. It broke all the rules but it was done so well, you wanted the rules to be broken and you were happy that they were.
Do whatever you want. Write whatever you want. I am convinced that if you do it well, readers will buy it. I know I would.
I’ll admit, even in the current day and age – I like the H&H to practice monagamy once they meet. It may be old fashioned, but if I’m going to get to do the ‘falling in love’ thing with them – I would feel betrayed if either strayed. I also must have a heroine who isn’t a doormat. If I have no respect for her – then I don’t want to read the book.
Well, I’m all for the HEA but as for the other rules, well, I tend to break or at least bend them (as a yet to be published single title author).
My feeling is that if there are SO many talented, experienced authors already following the formula, then why would a reader take a chance on me?
Why?
Because they want something different.
So that’s what I give them.
Is it just the cheating thing?
Not only that. How about SEP being told that sports stars were a no/no? What’s up with that? Yes, she did it anyway, with great success, but who came up with that “rule” in the first place? Was it TPTB? Or was it that readers wouldn’t buy them?
I think that as long as the author can write a good story it shouldn’t matter what rules they break.:grin:
I guess the success of SEP proves my point. If you write it well enough, people will buy it, no matter what rule you are breaking. (and by you, I mean the universal you)
Sylvia, I believe “character IS story” so when I say advance the story, the characters are integral to the story. Story, to me, isn’t “plot.”
Story, to me, isn’t “plot.â€
Gotcha!
Wow-This is a great article!
I am of the opinion that if an author wants to break the rules they can, as long as it makes sense. I read a book once where the author had the hero rape the heroine for no other reason than for shock value. It completely ruined an otherwise good book and I’ve never read one of their books since.
If it’s done creatively for all the right reasons…go for it!
I’m working on something right now that is going to break a lot of rules (in certain ways). Is it worth it? You betcha!
I hate the fences that get put up. And it’s even worse if you’re trying to break into the market. Because that’s when you really get nailed with the ‘that’ll never sell’ ‘tone that down’ ‘you’re hero is an arsehole’
I think the term romance novel has evolved over the years, and the fences need to be re-structured. If that makes any sense.
I think authors can break rules if they want, doesn’t mean that they are going to sell. Maybe they will but if they are not a good enough writer to carry the rule breaking then I won’t be wasting my money on their efforts in the future.
I don’t think Aspiring writers should be going around breaking rules just because they see a published author breaking them. The difference between them and you is that they are published and are probably a good enough writer to carry that rule breaking. You are not published and not anywhere near the writer they are. For every one published writer that breaks the rules, there are hundreds if not thousands that don’t. If you feel restricted by romance then maybe you should go and write something else.
I think that Sylvia is expressing her frustration not with the HEA, but with the journey to the HEA. Certainly characters equal plot to me as well, but why else are there so many cliched and/or uninspired characters and plotting out there if there was no “constraint” or “formula”? There are a lot of truly talented authors who are able to do something unique within the constraints, but also a lot who don’t because the constraints are like a glass ceiling that sometimes, authors don’t want to break for the sake of becoming published, and for others, takes some soul-searching and practice to learn how to graze the ceiling without being accused of not wanting to write a romance or introducing something that’s blatantly outside of the fence.
agree with the majority of comments.
[...] I visit individual blogs on a very infrequent basis due time constraints and a promise to myself not to get caught in the blog whirlwind that proved to be as consuming and emotional as a love affair a year ago. I try hard not to stir up controversy not because I’m faint of heart or lily-livered, but because there are so many other things–outside of the internet–that I can expend my words and energy on(though I do have my soapboxes). That said, I find myself the owner of a bit of smoldering frustration and bafflement as I read the recent post by Millenia Black. Even though this situation isn’t on the same subject as Millenia’s, it does correlate with Wayne’s RTB post earlier this month, and you know what? Even a bit with Sylvia’s RTB post. [...]