One of my favorite reads of last year was an anthology I unearthed from the depths of my TBR. The first story was probably my favorite. It had a nice, Americana, small town setting, a plucky heroine and a hero who enjoyed nothing more than ruffling her feathers. Everything was working, I was enjoying it, and then the sex scene arrived and ruined everything.
This might sound odd coming from someone typing this column surrounded by her erotica collection, but that sex scene pulled me right out of the story. Like all good things in life, there is a time and place for sex. It’s hard to explain, but that sex scene was very jarring. It didn’t fit the tone, or what I had perceived as the characters’ personalities. As it was, a story that had started out as a keeper slipped down to the “good” range. I still liked it, but it could have been perfect.
Outside of the inspirational genre, finding a “sex free” read anymore is not an easy task. Traditional Regencies have disappeared from mainstream New York publishing, and Harlequin has merged their Silhouette Romance and Harlequin Romance lines into one. Readers looking for sweet have serious homework to do before hitting the bookstore.
The perception seems to be that with the erotica boom going on that readers aren’t interested in “sex free” reads anymore. Not true. The problem is that readers are tired of getting toothaches.
Sometimes I just want a nice story about two people falling in love. No vampires, no werewolves, no serial killers, and no sexual Olympics. That probably sounds boring, but it really isn’t. The problem with sweet romances is that so often the author takes a shortcut to get to the “sweet.” Readers end up saddled with a neutered man and a woman so cutesy, naïve, and innocent that you’re left wondering how she has survived on her own. The answer is, she hasn’t. She needs that neutered man to rescue her on more than one occasion.
What readers want is the sweet without the saccharine. I want to read about equals. I don’t want to read about the hero falling in love with the syrupy heroine because frankly, he can do better. Sweet has never been the problem; it’s the Stepford characters that have infiltrated the books. Kick them out, and start writing about characters that feel “real” to the reader and the “no sex” won’t register much on their radar. In fact, they might find your sweet story a breath of fresh air.
**Sometimes I just want a nice story about two people falling in love. No vampires, no werewolves, no serial killers, and no sexual Olympics. That probably sounds boring, but it really isn’t. The problem with sweet romances is that so often the author takes a shortcut to get to the “sweet.” Readers end up saddled with a neutered man and a woman so cutesy, naïve, and innocent that you’re left wondering how she has survived on her own. The answer is, she hasn’t. She needs that neutered man to rescue her on more than one occasion.**
Amen Wendy. These days it seems more of the book is dedicated to the sex scenes than anything else, or it’s the opposite extreme. Why can’t there be more traditional romances that concentrate on the characters and their development instead of (sometimes) outlandish scenarios or non-stop sex? I just read Laura Guhrke’s “Guilty Pleasures” and we see how they grow and improve and challenge each other, yet there’s only 2 full sex scenes in the whole book. True, it was a historical, but I believe that’s irrelevant. Loved it, and I want more of the same.
by Stacy ~ February 27th, 2007 at 6:45 amI read quite a lot of novels in the Harlequin/Mills & Boon Romance line. As you say, the characters quite often don’t have sex or it’s described but not in great detail. And as you also say, the lack of it doesn’t ‘register much on my radar’. I only really noticed the lack of sex scenes when I started thinking about it because of an earlier post on this blog. Up until then it hadn’t even crossed my mind that they should have more sex in them. Though that could be because this is the sort of romance I’ve tended to read, so it’s the more explicit stuff that seems unusual to me.
by Laura Vivanco February 27th, 2007 at 7:00 amThanks for writing about this! It’s rare to find a decent story that’s not loaded with sex or sexual references. I read “A Game of Pleasure” by Barbara Satow recently and was pleasantly surprised to find a traditional-style regency with plenty of wit and spark… and the hero and heroine didn’t climb into bed once. It made me wish there were more books like that out there!
by Elizabeth K February 27th, 2007 at 7:00 amGreat post, Wendy. I read it with some amazement. It’s as if you’ve read my mind. That’s EXACTLY how I feel. I read most romance subgenres, but sometimes I just want an ordinary contemporary without any gimmicks; no paranormal elements, no innocent childlike virgins, no woman in peril, etc. Just an emotionally intense romance that’s about the romance, nothing else. These kind of stories are all too rare today so I have to go to my keeper shelves. I do a lot of re-reading these days.
I’d also love to find more stories, in any subgenre, where the heroine is as strong and capable as the hero. Not fiesty or sassy, or even worse, naive and innocent, but mature and smart. A mature adult not in need of rescue, emotionally or physically. For the life of me I don’t know why this kind of heroine is so hard to find in an industry that’s dominated by female writers. It’s a neverending source of amazement to me.
by Barbara B. February 27th, 2007 at 7:53 am:neutral:For me, I’ve run into way too many romance novels in which the sex scenes seem to have been taken from the stock room. There’s the romance story. And then there’s one or two sex scenes. In every novel, those scenes are pretty much the same. The relationship of the hero and heroine are not built up to it. And it doesn’t matter the experience level of the lovers or the time or cultural period. It’s all the same. Like a really boring marriage. Talk about formula romance. Come on, gang, we’re better than this!:wink:
by Kimber An February 27th, 2007 at 8:21 amI’m with Kimber An about plain Jane sex scenes. It drives me crazy when a talkative heroine shuts up during sex. I talk a lot and believe me, I don’t shut up during sex (maybe tmi there…LOL). Or what about the quiet hero who suddenly talks for pages during sex? From what I hear, just the opposite is bound to happen (I think a man’s mouth and that specific body part operate on the same bandwidth).
If the sex scene doesn’t tie in with the characters’ personalities (or show me another side), I skip it. I took sex 101 in high school. I know the mechanics.
by Kimber Chin February 27th, 2007 at 9:01 amCan’t agree more with your thoughts, in fact I’ve got something similar planned for my column next week. I’m tired of over the top characters, story lines and sex. I’ve been looking for something different and it just doesn’t seem to be out there.
by Tara Marie February 27th, 2007 at 9:13 amInteresting point, and worthy of a column. The mark of a totally unnecessary sex scene is that if it is dropped from the story, nothing changes. A necessary sex scene is one that takes the relationship somewhere.
by Poison Ivy February 27th, 2007 at 9:51 amI’ve read many wonderful stories in Harlequin’s Superromance line. I love the line for the rich stories, complex characters and the variety they have. I do tend to enjoy sexy romance more than sweet, but I’ve read everything from very hot Supers to ones with barely any sex, or just “sweet sex” that is extremely well done. I’ve read some nice Desires and Sil Romances lately, fun, sweet romance (not toothache sweet). Maria Snyder’s recent LUNA books were also terrific stories with romantic subplots that left me actually wanting MORE in the way of love scenes, but I think there’s plenty out there that do a good job in both respects, with sex and without.
Sam
by Samantha Hunter February 27th, 2007 at 10:20 amWhew! Reading these responses (and the original post) makes me feel better.
Some writers are gifted and can craft wonderful, extremely sensual but that are still within the bounds of good taste, sex scenes (Hey, Sam! I’m talking about you!) Others, like me, aren’t comfy with writing those scenes.
In this realm of really hot erotica/romantica, I was sure that many readers might not appreciate the “close-the-bedroom-door” approach I’ve often used in my Harlequin Superromances, as even other Super writers have far hotter scenes in their books than I write.
But for me, it’s better to stay true to myself and not force myself to do something that even the reader is going to see as NOT a good fit for me. What’s important is that the scene stay true to both the characters and the author’s style … I admit, there have been some wonderful books out there that I skimmed over the sex scenes because it DOES jar in that particular story.
by Cynthia Reese February 27th, 2007 at 10:40 amI agree with Poison Ivy, if the sex scene doesn’t make a difference to the story, or tell me about the characters, why include it?
by Marianne McA February 27th, 2007 at 10:43 amEqually, I read a set of reasonably good inspirational romances that missed being very good because the physical aspects of the relationships were ignored. If the characters chose not to have sex, that would be fine - I know people who’ve chosen to wait until their marriage. But why not have them holding hands, or hugging, or just feeling giddy when they see their beloved unexpectedly?
The mark of a totally unnecessary sex scene is that if it is dropped from the story, nothing changes. A necessary sex scene is one that takes the relationship somewhere.
Heh. No matter how many times I hear/read this in all its various forms I always want to shake it or rattle it until the logic falls apart for some reason. It’s not that I don’t understand the reasoning behind it. It just “sounds” wrong to me somehow.
I guess that’s because to me the idea of being able to pluck the sex scenes out just sounds wrong. Would we make the same analogy about murder scenes in a mystery? Somehow I don’t think so.
We go on and on about sex being something that should be respected more than violence and yet . . . hmmm?
On the other hand, as I said, I do understand the frustration of not finding good sweet romances when one is truly in the mood for one. The problem isn’t about plucking the sex scenes out because nothing will change but knowing the difference between slamming the bedroom door and keeping it out of sight in the first place.
Tell me this, is it truly a “sweet” romance if the issue of sex has come up but nothing happens or does that simply plant the idea and frustrate the reader even though nothing happens? And which is worse - too many sex scenes or none once the idea is planted?
by Bev(BB) February 27th, 2007 at 10:46 amIt is one reason I like Young Adult books. I don’t need sex to prove to me that a couple is in love or will live HEA.
by Jane February 27th, 2007 at 10:46 amI must read very different books than the rest of you . . . albeit I’m not looking for “sweet” when I hit the book store, but I don’t seem to be running into a dearth of plain old romances on the shelves (with your standard amount of non-erotica sex).
by Kalen Hughes February 27th, 2007 at 10:56 amYay, Wendy! Great post, and a much needed POV.
And yay, Barbara B. who said “I read most romance subgenres, but sometimes I just want an ordinary contemporary without any gimmicks; no paranormal elements, no innocent childlike virgins, no woman in peril, etc. Just an emotionally intense romance that’s about the romance, nothing else. These kind of stories are all too rare today so I have to go to my keeper shelves.” because that’s what I write.
Boy, do I hear ya. Trying to sell those stories outside of series romance, though… Not so easy.
I’m sure there are a lot of other readers looking for…what’s a good word, here? Sweet, as Wendy said, doesn’t really do it. Neither does “wholesome,” although I’m sure some readers would love that, too. But real and sexy doesn’t have to mean explicit sex, and I have serious issues with the mindset that says a couple can’t really fall in love (or you can’t have a complete romance) without sex.
Not true! Lots of people fall in love before they have sex! I did! Just think of all those wonderful older Hollywood love stories that left moviegoers tearfully clutching their bosoms at the end, when the handsome star finally kisses the heroine. OMG — the telephone scene in IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE, anyone?
I have often longed for the freedom to write my stories as they come to me, without feeling obligated to twist them (and myself) into knots so the couple can have sex. Even though I’d hang myself before writing a “tacked on” lovescene — and in the end I’ve been pleased with every one I’ve ever written, because they are unique to those characters, at that point in their lives — I still dream of being able to just write a nice little old fashioned love story, ya know?
An old fashioned love story with strong, funny, capable characters who just happen to fall in love with their clothes on.
by Karen Templeton February 27th, 2007 at 11:16 amAn old fashioned love story with strong, funny, capable characters who just happen to fall in love with their clothes on.
Yes, exactly. With old movies, it’s sort of a “blink and you’ll miss it” innocence. Innocence in the sense that you can watch it as a child and not get the undercurrents and watch the same movie as an adult and suddenly realize that what the characters where really talking about. And still wonder if they’re really talking about it. Hehehe.
That’s what I mean with regards to the difference between slamming the bedroom door and not even bringing it up. You want me think “sweet” - don’t slam that bedroom door in my face.
by Bev(BB) February 27th, 2007 at 11:34 amBoy, not even 9AM here on the west coast and already a lot of comments. Not bad when one considers I wrote this column in a semi-panic on Sunday afternoon
I’m not suggesting that “sex is bad,” as I’m a reader who loves sex scenes. I mean, I do adore erotica. But sometimes I just want that story about “nice people falling in love” without the gimmicks or kinky sex. Someone mentioned the Harlequin SuperRomance line and OMG! I love that line! Also, Silhouette Special Edition is great.
But like Karen said, it’s kind of hard to find these types of stories outside of category romance. I suspect what is happening is that “plain ole’ contemporaries” are getting swallowed up by the women’s fiction market. That’s just a guess on my part though.
Also, I want the “sweet” without the diabetic coma. I want mature characters. I don’t want to read about a heroine who seems stuck in the 1950s or even worse, high school ::shudder::
by Wendy February 27th, 2007 at 11:50 amI agree completely. With the exception of romantic comedies good old fashioned, non-category, contemporary romances are hard to find.
by Tara Marie February 27th, 2007 at 12:15 pmI agree completely. With the exception of romantic comedies good old fashioned, non-category, contemporary romances are hard to find.
Especially if you want the only focus to be on the romance. Now if you can handle a side focus on either a mystery or fantasy side story, then maybe . . . but realistically, you have to fill the pages with something and even if it’s just major changes in her life - well, isn’t that what moves it to women’s fiction in so many cases?
by Bev(BB) February 27th, 2007 at 12:28 pmInteresting…I love erotica and erotic romance. Hell, I write it. But some of my favorite books are the Elizabeth Peters Amelia Peabody series. Granted, they’re usually shelved under mystery rather than romance, but Crocodile on the Sandbank is romantic suspense (FUNNY romantic suspense) and the rest of them build on the romance between the main characters. While you know there’s sex going on after the first book, it’s all off-screen. The few teasing lines every six chapters or so letting you that they’re about to do something interesting are far more memorable than a lot of explicit sex scenes I’ve read because they’re so spot-on in character and so meaningful where they’re falling.
Something to remember, because I want to have that effect, only WITH all the fun details.
by Teresa February 27th, 2007 at 12:37 pmIt’s even difficult to sell vanilla women’s fic anymore (she said, staring at a pile of rejections for her latest WF attempt). It’s as if everything these days has to have a gimmick, be “out there” in some way, or editors aren’t interested. I said to my agent the other day that if Anne Tyler tried to break into publishing today, she’d be outta luck!
And yet…gimmicks get boring, fast. Classic, relateable conflicts grounded in everyday human experience — ratcheted up though they may be to achieve that “bigger than life” emotional thrust that makes a story compelling — don’t.
There’s a reason people still read, and love, Pride and Prejudice two hundred years after it was first published. There’s also a reason so many readers are walking out of bookstores empty handed.
IMO, while fantasy/adventure/titillation certainly have their place, the industry has forgotten those readers who’d like to cleanse their palates with a nice helping of “real” every now and then.
Which kinda veers away from Wendy’s original post a bit, I suppose. Still — speaking as someone who doesn’t choose her reading material based on sexual content –the sex that I do encounter in many books these days(outside of erotica, which is its own thing!) seems forced: too much, too often, too unrealistic. What at one point seemed daring — or, yes, realistic! — has ironically become, from sheer overkill, mundane.
Balance, folks. It’s all about balance. And unfortuntely, I think the industry has gotten seriously out of whack.
by Karen Templeton February 27th, 2007 at 12:59 pm[...] But there are many topics in blogdom that are more expansive than specific books. I.e., how to get out of a reading slump by JMC; finding sweet without the saccharine by Wendy; appeal of European v. American historical by Karen S to name a few. [...]
by Dear Author.Com | Should Authors Reach Out and Touch a Reader? February 27th, 2007 at 1:07 pmAwesome post! Much of what I wanted to say has been said, so I’ll leave it at that.
by Kristen Painter February 27th, 2007 at 1:08 pmWhile you know there’s sex going on after the first book, it’s all off-screen. The few teasing lines every six chapters or so letting you that they’re about to do something interesting are far more memorable than a lot of explicit sex scenes I’ve read because they’re so spot-on in character and so meaningful where they’re falling.
I would like to point something out. When I’m talking about slamming the bedroom door in the reader’s face, I’m not talking about this type of writing. I’ve read a handful of the Amelia Peabody books so I know exactly what’s she’s talking about and I never felt like I had a door slammed in my face there. I felt like the writer was letting me know what was going on without being explicit.
Big difference.
To me what we’re talking about are two extremes on the same pendulum swing. When we can talk about being able to pluck love scenes out of books without affecting the story, that’s just the opposite extreme from having them missing when they obviously should’ve been there and weren’t. The first is overkill, yes, maybe, whatever, but the last is slamming the bedroom door in the reader’s face and just as bad, too. If not worse for the simple reason that it can verge on censorship if taken to the extreme and did in the past in subtle and sometimes not so subtle ways.
Which is probably why we’re now seeing the opposite end of the pendulum swing.
The problem is that when we reach those extremes, both can suffer a problem in terms of having expectations “forced” upon them. So, I ask again, what truly constitutes “sex free” within romances in today’s society? Are they allowed to neck? Are they allowed to even think about sex? What doors can we open and still be sweet? Just how innocent is innocent?
by Bev(BB) February 27th, 2007 at 1:16 pmBev(BB):
I probably should have suspected that so many would latch on to the “sex free” aspect of this post - althouth at the time I was hastily writing it, I was thinking more about getting a “sweet” read without all the sugar. Mature characters instead of brain-dead little girls posing as heroines.
My short answer is that it depends on the characters. I know this sounds vague, but if it doesn’t feel “right” that the characters are ripping each other’s clothes off with their teeth, then it really jars me out of the story. Likewise, if I’m thinking a hot sex scene is around the corner and the author slams the door in my face, I’m equally as unhappy.
I guess it all boils down to the author’s voice for me. Some authors write wonderful love scenes. Great stuff, and I can’t imagine any of them “slamming the door” so to speak. Likewise, there are authors whose voice is primarily suited towards the “sweet” end of the spectrum and if they tried to throw in some BDSM - well it wouldn’t work for me either.
What I would like to see is both extremes and a middle ground living in harmony. Which I suppose makes me incredibly delusional. I’m a little tired of having the “trends” forced on me when what I really want is a little variety.
(And for the record - “sex free” for me is just kisses or “fade to black” right before the couple does the deed)
by Wendy February 27th, 2007 at 1:30 pmI write for Harlequin Romance. I used to write for SR. My books would be called sweets yet I hope there’s sexual tension in there too. My characters, especially the heroes, think about sex. I don’t think it’s realistic to have a hero not think/want to have sex. That’s how men think. But in the sweets, they might take it to the edge of their control and then pull back. Something (the heroine, their conflict, interuption) keeps them from going to the next step, but that kiss, touch, etc, ups the stakes for the two characters.
One of my favorite movie scenes is in the most recent Pride and Prejudice when you see Mr. Darcy help Elizabeth into the carriage. The camera focuses on the touch of their hands, and it’s just so sexy and much better than any sex or kiss scene could have been.
And if you listen to the audio commentary on Notting Hill you’ll hear the producers talk about how they were going to have the characters have sex early on, during the magazine interview scene, but were convinced by the writer of Bridget Jones Diary if I’m remembering correctly, not to do that because it would ruin the relationship.
I think that’s the key to kiss scenes in sweets or sex scenes in not-so-sweets. They have to come at the right point in the story. For both the characters and the readers.
by Melissa McClone February 27th, 2007 at 1:36 pmI write what would be classed as ’sweet’ reads but some of my scenes have plenty of sexual tension. My heroines and heros are very ‘real’. My heroines range in age from nineteen and that first headlong falling in love to mid late thirties who’ve had lives and relationships. The feel and the tension is different in each one and that’s part of the challenge of writing sweet. My favorite authors in the romance lines are Liz Fielding and Jessica Hart. I’d recommend them to anyone looking for a relistic ’sweet’ romance.
by Nell Dixon February 27th, 2007 at 3:31 pmGreat topic Wendy. I can’t say that the presence/absence of sex makes a story sweet. However, I want a relationship and story that works. And I’ve finished (or not finished) a number of romances that have gone in ludicrous directions to include the requisite number of sex scenes.
by LinM February 27th, 2007 at 3:43 pmOh, man, I’m so happy to see this post and all the responses! When I first started writing, I didn’t even know I was writing romance until someone in my critique group told me. ‘Cause I don’t write sex scenes. It’s not that I don’t want my characters to have sex (they do, sometimes. and sometimes they don’t), it’s just that I much prefer to write a love story. The relationship is the “all” to me, the meeting and falling and pining and working through the conflict. I just have always focused on the emotions rather than the mechanics. But when it came time to market my novels, forget it. If you’re not writing sweet category, there didn’t seem to be anyone who wanted a contemporary love story. Maybe it is women’s fiction; I don’t know. I finally signed with an e-publisher who was willing to take a chance, and I’m thrilled about it. But why is it that if you write romance, invariably you’re expected to either heat up the pages with explicit bedroom scenes or have a couple devout in faith who wants to wait until marriage? Aarghh………
by Allie B February 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pmGreat column! I agree with you. It IS so hard to find a normal contemporary these days. And one with just warm loving “fits into the story” sex is even harder.
by Kristie(J) February 27th, 2007 at 6:44 pmAs an author of paranormal, fantasy and science fiction erotic romance, I have to say I agree with this post 100%.
I love a good sex scene, and I do enjoy writing them, but it’s not all I write. I want to craft a romance, and while it’s wonderful that erotica and erotic romance sells like hot cakes these days, it’s distressing to think that publishers might assume that’s all readers want.
by Bernadette Gardner February 27th, 2007 at 7:20 pmI don’t go looking for a book that ranks as “sweet” but I’m rather tired of gratuitous and badly written sex. I love a good sex scene, but I want it to move the story forward. Sometimes it actually stops the story or makes no sense according to the plot.
Recently I read a book by Dawn Calvert called HERO WORSHIP. It had a hot half naked guy on the cover and I started reading. Enjoyed it fairly well, and when I finished it, I realized there wasn’t a single up n down to be had in the whole thing.
by Annie Dean February 28th, 2007 at 12:21 am