The other day I felt the need to remind my mom not to feed the animals outside her home, there have been bears in the area and Mom informed me that my sister had already given her the “Don’t feed the bear†lecture. For some strange reason when she said this, “Don’t feed the stereotypes,†popped into my head and there I had the idea for this column.
This is actually my second draft of this column, originally I was kind of snarky about authors including all sorts of stereotypes and clichés in their books, and then it hit me. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. As romance readers we have stereotypes and clichés thrown at us from all direction. Either we love them, ignore them or hate them. It all seems to be part of that symbiotic relationship between author and reader.
It’s probably safe to assume most readers and romance authors hate the romance equals trash stereotype that gets tossed around by non-romance readers. Clinch covers and bad titles don’t help this assumption. If we’re cringing at bad covers and titles like The Greek Tycoon’s Pregnant Virgin Bride (please don’t let that be a real title) is it any wonder that these folks are snickering at us? Not that I really care about covers or book titles, but sadly some are missing out on great books because they actually do “judge a book by it’s cover.†Do these books sell because of their covers and titles or in spite of them?
We blame the publishers for what’s on the cover, but what about between the covers? I’m not a big fan of ethnic stereotypes, but a good friend loves them and searches out anything with Shieks, Latinos, Italians… Recently I read 2 books filled with all sorts of stereotypes and clichés and I loved both! How is that possible? I noticed them but ignored them because the stories worked for me. Would the stories have worked even more if they weren’t included—I don’t know, maybe not.
So I’m left wondering…
Do all red heads have fiery tempers and green eyes? Are all Italian’s hot heads? Can you imagine what a red headed Italian’s temper must be like? The only red headed Italian I know is my Aunt Catherine and she’s a soft-spoken church secretary.
Why do 2nd, 3rd, and 4th … generation Hispanic, Italian and Cajun men all revert back to their grandparent’s mother tongue while making love? Does anyone else remember Gray’s little speech about this in Linda Howard’s After the Night “Baby, if I can still think clearly enough to speak French, then I’m not totally involved in what I’m doing…†I guess it’s okay if it’s The Italian Playboy’s Mistress, Girlfriend, Wife, whatever…
Should all vampires be tormented, wear black and speak without ever using a contraction?
Are all unmarried titled men in Regency England “Rakes� Most aren’t even real Rakes. Then what are they, hmmm let’s see… we’ve got the bored rich man who doesn’t really want to marry, but knows he must provide an heir and a spare. Then there’s the poor man trying to regain the family fortunes that his evil grandfather/father/brother gambled away or squandered in some get rich quick scam, usually perpetrated by the villain. And, let’s not forget the spy working to protect his country. Not a real Rake in the bunch.
Does “feisty†in the back blurb mean the heroine will inevitably do something stupid enough to need rescuing by the hero? The back blurb can’t say “she fights the hero at every turn, needs rescuing 3 times and doesn’t realize she’s in love until the last 20 pages.†And, why are these heroines always the ones who scream “No†but can always be manipulated into “Yes�
I’ve noticed there seems to be a slight resurgence in western and post Civil War romances… Why are Confederate officers considered better romance material than Union officers? Will these books make a comeback?
If there’s a gay man in a historical there’s a good chance he’s going to be the villain—why?
And how many people complain about sexually repressed widows in historicals? Or better yet, how about the virgin widow? That always requires major explaining.
Whether you like, ignore or hate them stereotypes and clichés abound. But, why do they work in some books and not others?
No related posts.
LOL. Great post Tara Marie. I loved your examples. I know a lot of readers have the same thoughts about the very same thing. Sometimes I think I’m conditioned to just accept what I read. That’s my own fault.
But I do believe cliches can work if they are written well. It shouldn’t require a lot of explaining, or always be the “safe” explanation. (Example: virgin marries ill or elderly gentleman and ends up a virgin widow. That one is really overused). I like writers who take a cliche and turn it upside down and present it in a different way. It doesn’t have to be dramatic, just something that makes me go “oh, that’s different” or “I wasn’t expecting that”. I believe it can be done.
I’m curious to hear how some writers feel about stereotypes and cliches.
Yeah, I always wondered why sometimes they work and most times they don’t. It’s like everytime I say I absolutely hate a certain thing, there’s always at least one exception to the rule.
Some stereotypes are comforting rituals.
I wishwishwish the word “feisty” had not been invented.Makes me gag.
It really is all in the execution. That’s my explanation. Because you can point to any example and somewhere there’s an author who pulled it off and made it work! Probably cliches become cliches because they worked so well for so many.
Terriffic post, Tara. You had excellent examples. I, unfortunately, am one who is turned off by a bad cover. Intellectually, I know it’s not the author’s fault ~ but if a cover is truly that awful I won’t buy the book. And I’m sure I’m missing out. I’m sure there’s a great story within the pages, but I can’t get past the cover.
I loved your section about the Rakes. And honestly, I’d never really thought about it before. But do you know how many years I’ve read books with Rakes ~ only to discover that they’re simply being stereotyped and aren’t such bad guys after all?
Again, well done. I hope to see more articles by you posted here in the future.
I like the idea of the laid-back, Type B redhead.
This post has really put a smile on my face this morning! Especially the vampires who avoid contractions as assiduously as they do holy water and wooden stakes. Some cliches and stereotypes of romanceland I still enjoy, like the tortured hero, for example. Heck, I’ll still occasionally read a secret baby story and that’s one of the most hated and ridiculed cliches. Fiesty and/or red-headed, however, I can no longer tolerate. I reached my saturation point about five years ago and now fiesty and/or red-headed heroines actually enrage me. I feel majorly duped if I buy a book with a red-headed or fiesty heroine where it wasn’t revealed either on the cover or in the blurb. I’ve lost all sanity when it comes to fiesty and red-headed.
I think we have a love/hate relationship with sterotypes. On the one hand we get so tired of them and long for something different. But then we read a book where the writing is so good, that even if it is a sterotype that’s been done to death, we get hooked by how much we loved them when we first started reading them.
Why do 2nd, 3rd, and 4th … generation Hispanic, Italian and Cajun men all revert back to their grandparent’s mother tongue while making love?
I laughed out loud at this one. Great post, Tara Marie. I agree with Charlene — it’s all in the execution. That said, even good writing won’t get me past a seriously offensive stereotype.
I laughed out loud at that too Lynne! And the vampires who don’t use contractions!
Like someone before me said, I think it’s all in execution. I can ignore the most annoying of cliches if the author writes characters I can care about. If they have me engaged, the story has me engaged (for better or worse). I’ve even been known to like stories that feature :::shudder::: secret babies….
So true, Wendy! When I read about vampires that are still hung-up on what happened to them a few hundred (or thousand) years ago and who still have an accent or speech patterns from the Mother Country, I start wondering what in the world they’ve been doing all this time? Heck, I start to pick up new accents even after a week of being somewhere else, and after a couple hundred years, I think my original accent would be pretty much gone.
Hilarious post, Tara!
I think it’s all in the execution too. There are just authors out there who’ll have me read every single thing they write just because it has their name on it. Same thing.
Why do 2nd, 3rd, and 4th … generation Hispanic, Italian and Cajun men all revert back to their grandparent’s mother tongue while making love? — LOL!! I work hard not to write stereotypes. This one had me laughing out loud. I’m here to tell you (as the wife of a 1st generation Mexican) that he NEVER reverts to Spanish in moments of passion! Ever.
LMAO!! What a great post.
Here’s my theory – for what it’s worth: I think that authors (myself included) use stereotypes as a lazy way of portraying our characters (unconsiously, of course!). If our heroine is a red headed Irish girl, we know that the reader will immediately make the assumption that she’s hot-tempered, passionate and rebelleous. This saves the author a lot of work!
Just a thought…
Great post, Tara, and oh, so true!
I wrote an article about cliches in
romance writing once because I got fed up of hearing about that ‘over-stuffed armchair’! amongst other phrases. I think it’s a trap we all fall into from time to time [eek, I've just demonstrated another cliche!]
Lynette
I think you hit on almost all of the major steroetypes there, Tara Marie!
Why do 2nd, 3rd, and 4th … generation Hispanic, Italian and Cajun men all revert back to their grandparent’s mother tongue while making love? –
This one cracked me up as well.
I also think that the sterotype, or ‘formula’, is what got us all hooked on romance in the first place. Knowing what to expect, when to expect it, and knowing that it will all work out as a HEA in the end. As long as it is well done, well executed, well written and supported, I’m good with it.
Although, I must admit, it’s interesting to sit back and watch the trends come and go.
I have to agree with Charlene as well. A big part of it is the execution to be sure. Different cliches/stereotypes work for different people. But it’s mostly the author’s inventiveness with a tried and true stereotype that makes it good or special.
Hi Ladies, I agree what makes cliches and stereotypes work is the execution, and to be completely honest I love when an author can turn one upside down.
Dateline did a great show about stereotypes last night. I think it’s skill, being able to make a cliche three-dimensional. Of course, in doing so, they are no longer stereotpyical because they’re real.
And please, no more black horses named Diablo!
There is a difference between stereotype and archetype. Just as there is a difference between form and formula.
A writer needs to master archetypes and forms, rather than relying on stereotypes and formula.
The writer has to understand and make the forms of romance writing her own. It is in the making a character her own, even though on the surface the rake, the virgin, the bad girl with a heart of gold have been done a thousand times before that a writer shows her true talent imho. It is the mastering of the archetype that allows the writer to bring something new to the table.
As Robert McKee in his excellent book –Story– substance, structure, style and the principles of screenwriting says: *Anxious inexperienced writers obey rules; rebellious unschooled break rules; an artist masters the form.*
So here is to mastering the archetype, rather than reproducing the stereotype. It is indeed all in the execution.
As an aside — I do know readers (my mil’s next door neighbour is a case in point) who simply buy on the word –Virgin or Blackmail or Mistress. In sales terms, these titles tend to outsale other titles. And it is at some level all about sales.
Hence the reason I am very pleased that my fourth historical for Harlequin mills and Boon set in ancient Rome was given the title: The Roman’s Virgin Mistress.
I don’t want to take this light hearted discussion of stereotypes into too serious waters, but …
What follows is a paraphrase of a post I made in my live journal back in July, during Blog Against Racism Week. (A movement that did not impress me much.) For the record, I’m a man in my fifties who has had the good fortune to be married to an absolutely fabulous woman for over a quarter of a century. The first thing outsiders notice about our marriage is the very least important: I am white and Valerie is black.
Back in July, after dissing the whole self-congratulatory exercise of folks posting about how they’d overcome racism and even had minority friends, I wrote:
“One marginally useful topic was writers discussing their use of non-white characters. I do because most of the people I’m around are non-white — in fact, now that I’m no longer teaching ESL, the majority are black. I’ve been startled by my own reflection on occasion. So, while breaking down stereotypes is something I’m aware of — very often my characters’ ethnicities come from my own experience rather than a conscious effort to showcase a given group.
“Classic BattleTech [a science fiction game-based universe in which I write] is overwhelmingly white with a strong Asian presence, but almost no black characters, so my stories tend to stand out there. (I shell shocked the art department at BattleCorps [a science fiction web site] a couple of years ago when a character I described as a very dark complected “Afro-Terran” who wore her hair in cornrows was depicted as a Mexican woman with braids. They took my lecture so to heart that, even though the lead character of a story that ran last year was described as blonde, they said “it’s one of HIS stories” and illustrated her as black.)
“I think one way writers can make a difference is through their stories — write authentic minority characters. Make our medium reflect the multicultural reality around us. Present the images until they are no longer noteworthy. Tell stories. Tell good stories that people remember. Wear the racist conventions down. It’s a war of attrition.”
As far as tropes or archetypes of romance fiction go, they can be as comfortable — or as annoying — as the tropes of any other genre. We all know that the “lone wolf” private investigator probably can’t do an effective job because information gathering is all about networking. And no alien race is going to want our natural resources — much less all our blonde women — because it costs more to get here and go home again than anything they find here would be worth. (Okay, maybe cow lips — but besides that.) And you’d be amazed to discover how few misfit teens are really secret wizards/elves/aliens/telepaths who have been fostered/hidden among normal humans for their own safety.
But racial or ethnic stereotypes? Whether rhythmic black, inscrutable Asian, noble indigenous savage, or Mafiosi Italian — there is no excuse. It doesn’t matter how many examples you can cite from real life, it’s not right. (Or as right as taking the fact that almost all pedophiles are white males and making all of your white male characters pedophiles.)
Don’t feed the stereotypes? Hunt them down and kill them. Because no matter how widespread they might be, none of them is true.
Except, of course, everyone knows vampires can’t use contractions.
Great post, Tara Marie! I agree with what everyone said… it’s all about execution. For instance, I absolutely loathe the secret baby. The secret baby is my least favorite cliche.
And yet Liz Carlyle did some good stuff ala secret baby in her last trilogy.
Yes, if it is a sterotype that’s been done to death, we get hooked by how much we loved them when we first started reading them.
Amen sister. I am pretty sure it isn’t the stereotyped characters that keep me reading. It’s the romace between the characters that I am looking for in this genre. I wish authors would mix up the characterizations a bit. At least that would provide some variety.
Michelle, Yikes…”(my mil’s next door neighbour is a case in point) who simply buy on the word –Virgin or Blackmail or Mistress.” Now, that’s just a little scary. Umm, good luck with your “The Roman’s Virgin Mistress.”
Kevin, “Don’t feed the stereotypes? Hunt them down and kill them. Because no matter how widespread they might be, none of them is true.” I agree completely, I kept this light, but I agree there are some stereotypes that need a quick death.
Tara, I knew I was getting much more heavy handed than you had intended, but stereotypes are a real hot button with me. (Believe me, you got “KeVin lite” on the topic. I tend to go into scorched-earth mode so fast most folks get whiplash.) Sorry for the semi-hijack of a delightful thread.
Interestingly enough, Rosario Ottati’s 9/18 post about treating contemporaries written twenty or thirty years ago as historicals is very useful in regards to stereotypes. It at least allows the reading of good but outdated books without cringing.
Ack! Borrowed my daughter’s computer for that last post. That was no anonymous, that was me.
Stereotypes that offend–that have ever been known to offend–should be killed immediately. But some are comforting and therefore, readers gravtitate to them. Remember that all stereotypes begin with a kernel of truth.
So is it stereotypical that African-American parents in the ’50s and ’60s emphasized education with their children because the educational opportunities they sought were hard to come by? Yep. Not true in every case of course. But that’s an example of a positive stereotype, and one not likely to offend. Could be the making of an uplifting story.
Do all African-American young men have brushes with the law, know someone who sells drugs or is in prison, and hope to be professional athletes or singers? Nope. Yet these are the types of stereotypes that do offend and sadly are perpetuated. Probably would turn me off from reading if I found any of this in a cover blurb.
Writers need to be smart and be sensitive to their audience.
Whether you like, ignore or hate them stereotypes and clichés abound. But, why do they work in some books and not others?
Because sometimes they really do fit the plot, er, story being told?
Sometimes, too, I believe what we see as stereotypes on a surface level may actually have more in common with archetypes and those resonate or they wouldn’t be archetypes. What lifts them from one level to the other is the author’s storytelling skill, plain and simple.
When I think of all the times Jayne Ann Krentz has actually made me like reading about prim and proper librarians just by throwing simple but quirky curves into their story . . . I mean she even gets away with it on her heroes!
Bev, you may have noticed I didn’t use the librarian stereotype in the column…
It’s my favorite, always a sucker for a good librarian story.:lol:
Me, too. I always tell myself I’ve read so many with libraians in them, I certainly don’t need to read another and doggone it if I don’t pick up another one. Same thing with booksellers, although they’re not nearly as stereotyped. I think it’s the book thing.
Yeah, but they all do that
I’ve never written any genre fiction, unless there’s a genre called “sucky,” but from what I’ve read, I have to believe that an essential component thereof is an adroit manipulation of cliché: if your characters are stock, they should be…