Unlike most genre readers, I came to Romance late, years, in fact, after discovering the genre through one of my college roommates. And like any convert, once I got into Romance (through that same college roommate, now one of my BFFs), I embraced the genre with the enthusiasm of a true zealot, convinced that all my friends who love books were missing out on some incredible reads.
But my experience trying to convert those other friends has not, by and large, been very successful. A book here and there might slip through: I got one friend hooked on JD Robb’s In Death series, another got a handful of books into Evanovich’s Stephanie Plum series, and Charlaine Harris’s Sookie Stackhouse has been a relatively easy sell – but none of those series is pure Romance.
Even my own conversion was a bit rough. One of the first Romance novels I read was Kinsale’s The Shadow and The Star, and my first time through the book convinced me that Leda embodied every Romance stereotype I suspected the genre proffered. Then there was Black Silk by Judith Ivory, which was an immediate keeper, hitting all my literary fiction buttons, I suspect. I probably started The Windflower ten times before I was finally able to read it through, and by that time, I was immersed in the genre, so the datedness of some of the language didn’t distract me.
But the road to that acceptance was by no means straight. It took me three good reads of the Kinsale book before I understood how Leda was subverting more stereotypes than she was affirming, and those progressive reads took place within the context of more historical Romance reading: Patricia Gaffney, the Laura London Regencies, Jo Goodman, more Kinsale and Ivory books, and then on to Lisa Kleypas, Loretta Chase, Emma Holly, and Susan Johnson, among others.
I read a lot of books in a short period of time, learning the language of Romance, its dominant types and tropes, metaphors and themes, immersing myself in its different iterations. For a long time I couldn’t read contemporaries, because each book I picked up read like a battle of sexual politics, exhausting me and distracting me from the romantic theme. It wasn’t until I was much better schooled in the genre that I could read contemporaries and not feel overset by the sexual politics. It was the same for category Romance; I had to be almost fluent in Romance before I could widely appreciate the compacted page count and time frame in category.
No one knows better that Romance is a paradigm than veteran readers and outsiders; the only difference is the way each responds to its characteristics and limits. Had I not been introduced to the genre by someone who knew my taste in books, I cannot imagine where I would have started reading, and what the results would have been. For almost a full year, I was reading almost exclusively out of print books pulled from a carefully prepared list. Once I ventured off that list, there were many highs and lows, but because I had already experienced some incredible books, I persisted past the lows.
So to some degree I understand when my friends don’t automatically make the conversion to genre Romance. Like any language, Romance seems most easily mastered young, which may be why so many of its readers trace their love of the genre to their teens. As a late bloomer I had to polish up my translation skills when I started reading Romance, since it didn’t fit immediately into my reading expectations and experiences. Because I had such a strong interest in popular fiction and had studied the captivity narrative out of which genre Romance evolved, I wanted to appreciate and enjoy the genre, which probably kept me reading when others might have resisted.
And now that I am a convert, I worry, sometimes, that all those things I noticed so readily when I first started the genre are still very much there but invisible to me somehow. I want a little of that skepticism back, along with the novice’s curiosity that often led to excitement at reading something I had never seen before. For every book that unsettled and frustrated me, another surprised and delighted me, and both reactions were exciting in their own way. Now I most definitely enjoy Romance, but sometimes I worry that my sharpness as a reader has been blunted by my proficiency at reading genre.
And as for getting others to share the love, I am starting to believe that the later one is introduced to the genre the harder it will be to convert.
So tell me, what was your conversion to the genre like? Did you start early or later, and was your love of the genre immediate or gradual? Have you ever tried to convert someone else to the genre, and how has that worked? Do you think Romance readers have something in common that makes them love the genre, or do you think that anyone can embrace the genre if they just read the right book?
No related posts.
I started reading romance novels because they were there. We had books in our house; I read them. I read my brother’s horror comics alongside Beau Geste, Bobby Fisher’s guide to chess, science fiction, poetry, Shakespeare, and Harlequin romances. I read voraciously, omnivorously. It never occurred to me to leave any type of book unread. It still doesn’t. I love good stories, period, and there are good stories to be found under all labels.
I’m glad my reading went this way, because I know too many people who won’t read “those books” (for “those” you can insert any label; classics, horror, sf, romance, non-CBA) and I sort of recoil in shock at all the good books they’re missing out on.
I do think proficiency in any genre leads to deeper appreciation to specific books in that genre, though. It gives context.
Ack. Should be “of” specific books, not “to”. Sorry. Posting before coffee.
I came late. I admit, I was one of those who laughed at my roomie for reading romances. She made me try one, though — and it must have been the right one, because I was hooked.
I think that with many people, it would just take the “right book.” Why? Because what is the one thing that unites all humans? The desire for companionship and relationships.
Romances just feel good. A good one can give you that high you feel when you meet that special someone. You get to fall in love all over again.
I truly fail to see why the genre is looked down on when, in real life, love is something people want, just like they want a good job, health, etc.
And look how many mainstream fiction books and movies feature a romantic subplot? People eat those up!
So yeah, I think for a lot of people, it’s just the right book.
And yes, I’ve gotten a few people hooked. It’s fun! *g*
Hello, Robin
I liked your article today. It got me thinking about my journey to Romance.
I read Victoria Holt when I was young (and usually, they were either new or in their first re-print!). Then, for a long time, I became jaded with the romance genre. Things happened in my life that soured me to romance in general. I started reading murder mysteries, maybe because the tone was closer throughout most of the story to what I was going through. I’d forgotten the reason I ever picked up a book to begin with, and that was to lose myself in a wonderful story that made me feel satisfied at the end that all was well with the world again.
About four years ago, after exhausting myself on depressing reads and learning almost every way there is to kill someone, I picked up a romance and thought, ‘why not’? I’d read them when I was young, still had wonderful memories of Ms. Holt’s work, still even had my copies which had moved with me throughout my life. For some reason, I could never bring myself to take them to the used book store.
I picked up a great book by an excellent author, contemporary, but never-the-less, and read it in four hours. And I was once again hooked!
Not only do I read it again now, I write it as well and have passed along several books to friends who admitted they’d never read a romance in their lives. I based each book I sent them on their personality, and they are all avid romance readers now as well.
I think in some ways, you may be right, it may often be harder to convert someone the later they come to it however, I think, given the ‘right’ book, most convert happily and in turn, pass their conversion on to others.
Thanks for getting my brain working this morning. Almost don’t need my coffee! Almost…
I read a handful as a teen and thought the heroes were jackasses and the heroines were To Stupid To Live and they were all a bunch of baby-haters.
I can’t remember why, but sometime in my mid-thirties I picked up STAR KING by Susan Grant and was thunderstruck. 
I had not idea the Romance genre could be so multi-dimensional! Spaceships, a heroine mom over forty, a hero who loves her stretchmarks? Wow! Now that was something I could enjoy and even relate to. I was in from that point on. I’m still one of those readers who devours books across all genres, however. I prefer the buffet. 
I started around the age of 12 (with Barbara Cartland’s novels) because I ran out of other books to read (our library was very small and I speedread). It took me about 50 books to start believing in love.
There was a stretch though (after my parents’ marriage really got messy) when I couldn’t read romance. I again doubted love existed.
Then I met my now-hubby and fell in love at first sight. I returned to romance whole heartedly.
That’s why I cheer when romance novel sales increase. I correlate that (probably incorrectly) with the number of people believing in love.
I started in my teens, reading my grandmother’s People’s Friends and Mills and Boons. I read Victoria Holt, Andre Norton and hosts of other wonderful authors. I will read most genres (except horror). Different types of books appeal to different people and I suspect, at different points in their lives. Category romance was my lifeline when I spent hours at the hospital with medical problems. I needed that promise of a happy ending. I’ve introduced others to romance but each person is different and for me romance includes the classic Jane Austens as well as literary fiction if there is a strong romantic element.
Great topic!
I don’t know whether to say I started reading romances when I was around age 13 and began reading Jude Devraux novels that my mom kept in the closet, or if those Sunfire novels from the Scholastic Book Club that I began reading in 4th or 5th grade was my real start on the genre. What hooked on both the Sunfires and the grown-up romances was finding true love. I had never been in love, hadn’t been on a date or been kissed, and the idea of finding my one True Love was appealing.
I’m with Nell in including Jane Austen in romance, and by that measure I started reading romance when I was very young. I also read my way through all of Heyer’s romances in my teens. However, although I took sneak peeks at second-hand Mills & Boons, I didn’t start buying them or reading them all the way through until a few years ago. When I did, I didn’t find them at all difficult to understand or get in to.
I started reading romances in earnest about 1.5 years ago. I’m in my thirties, and I started by picking up a copy of a J.R. Ward book, not realizing it was romance. Many have said Ward is like crack, so I guess I went straight to the rad stuff, because I’ve been hooked ever since.
For about 15 years, I read almost no fiction of any kind. I was just too busy. But I picked up the Ward at just the right time in my life.
I also think that the genre has improved over the years.
Finally, I also think there’s a temperamental piece to romance readership. We who read it respond to it in some basic way, and I don’t know how to explain why or what that is. I don’t like it when people put it down to the need to escape an unhappy life (I’m pretty happy, in fact, and any fiction is escape, come to think of it). Maybe it’s a keen interest in romantic relationships and a love of hope. I don’t know.
Great topic!
I don’t do “conversion” per se. I love to discover new authors and genres, so I try to give friends books that will do that for them. I don’t tell the recipients I’m converting them, or label the book a romance or a thriller. I’ve had luck giving friends JD Robb and Jennifer Crusie, but I don’t push those friends to read more romance unless they ask for recommendations.
It’s all right if people think they don’t read romance; as Charlene said, it’s just a way of saying “those” books, where “those” means “stuff I expect to dislike”. They may be using an imprecise term, e.g. labeling all romance as “those” books instead of bodice rippers or mantitty covers as “those” books. Fine. If I changed their thinking so they couldn’t use the word “romance”, they’d still have a “those” books category, and they’d still get stuck in a reading rut because they’re afraid to try anything new for fear of encountering “those”.
do you think that anyone can embrace the genre if they just read the right book?
I don’t really get the concept of embracing a whole genre, so I suppose I’m in the “right book” camp. For me it’s about the individual books, not the genre. I’ve found many right books in romance, so I’ve stuck with the genre for years. I also find the right books in other genres.
I’ve been trying to convert my two best friends for years. They read the books I loan them, like some, but always insist that my work is far superior. Although it’s sweet of them to think so, they’re wrong! They still have the attitude that most romance is of lesser quality.
Argh!
Some people just can’t be converted.
I became an addict to romance early on (early teens, in fact), and have pretty much always read it.
Converting others depends a lot, in my experience, on how open they are to the idea that quality is not tied to genre but to writing. As an example, my immediate family won’t touch romances no matter what, while my s.o. has been happily reading them for over two year now.
I’m one of those people who never completely embrassed romance. I was hard convert. I didn’t actually start reading it until I was in college, and then it was not very often. Still, I’m a member of RWA and have friends who write hardcore romance. I don’t. I think because I get tried of the formula of the language and story.
I’d never read romance until my mother left a paperback behind after a visit. Since I read everything from cereal boxes on up, I had no problem reading it. I wish I could remember who wrote it and what the title was. All I remember is that it reminded me of the Highlander show I’d been watching on my son’s recommendation (and which ultimately got me starting writing). To that point, I was almost exclusively a mystery or science fiction reader.
After I learned a bit of the craft with my fanfiction, I tried an original story–a mystery, I thought until my daughters told me it was a romance.
So, I was well into my ‘maturity’ before I started reading romance to see what it was like. I tend to gravitate toward romantic suspense, because of the way the genre combines what I knew I enjoyed and what I learned I enjoyed.
As a matter of fact, when I read a ’straight’ mystery, I’m always paying more attention to any relationships than to the crime solving, I think.
Like some of the rest of you, my start in reading romance was more accidental than by choice. My little town had no library or bookstore. My beloved aunt would pass on her romance books that she bought at the grocery store. As a teenage I read anything I could find so I read those romances by default and fell in love with the genre. I read lots of things now but romance is my first stop shopping place.
Thank you for all the interesting responses; I’m fascinated by the different stories, especially between those who started reading Romance as a teenager and those, like me, who picked up the genre later.
One of the reasons this topic fascinates me is that there seems to be tremendous genre loyalty with Romance. Not just ‘I love to read, including Romance,’ but ‘I love to read Romance.’ I’m genuinely interested in knowing how that evolves, whether, as Jessica said, there’s something particular to Romance or to Romance readers that has created such a strong bond of loyalty.
Because beyond the RWA definition of the genre, which is quite broad, there do seem to be particular types and tropes and coded situations in the genre that prevail. Is it just because they sell better, have they become synonymous with the definition of the genre for readers, or do we become habituated over time to particular genre patterns. And are those readers who still cross read extensively more apt to pick up genre Romance books that challenge what seem to be the genre’s basic tropes or does it matter. And are there any real differences between native Romance readers and late adopters, as readers?
Great post, and wonderful responses.
I no longer bother to try to convert readers directly–but I’ll give them a book I think they’ll love and just allow matters to take their course.
As for myself, I’ve always read romances, beginning with a passion for fairy tales at age five, and moving on to Victoria Holt, Mary Stewart, Barbara Cartland and Presents.
But then, as now, I’ve always read across the board. Romances are part of my literary diet, along with chick lit and literary novels and historicals and nonfiction and memoirs. It always surprises me to meet someone who is a rabid reader who loves all other forms of commercial fiction, but hesitates to read romances, worried about buying them or being seen with them.
I had to convert my mother. She was afraid I would “prostitute my talent” by writing romance, but she loves it now. I’m not sure she chooses it all that often on her own, but at least I’ve found ways to offer her romances that will be her cup of tea. (Mainly they can’t look like romances, which is that prejudice again!)
No conclusions, but thanks for asking the questions.
are those readers who still cross read extensively more apt to pick up genre Romance books that challenge what seem to be the genre’s basic tropes
That describes my reading. I don’t know if it’s a common pattern, and I’m not sure how to quantify “more apt”. I read a lot of romance, challenging and not, but the romances that I see as challenging basic tropes are among those I love best.
are there any real differences between native Romance readers and late adopters, as readers?
I didn’t say so earlier, but I’m an “early adopter” who discovered romance as a teen. However, I continued to read classics and other genres alongside romance.
I wrote a rather long post about this recently. Here it is in a nutshell: I was drawn to books with romantic elements from early on, I then took a break from reading “those books” (meaning not just romance) for roughly ten years, and in 2000 I discovered romance novels for real. Now I read a lot of genres but romance is my preference.
As for conversions, I don’t them, but I gave a few romance novels (Crusie, Roberts) as presents when I thought they might fit in the past.
I definitely see a development with the romance novels I prefer to read now/like or think good compared to my beginning several years ago. Now what kind of development that is exactly, I’m not so sure, but it’s a question I find fascinating and I like to puzzle over it.
I came to Jane Austen via a television adaptation of Emma — in black and white! I must have been 12ish, since I’d just moved into the adult library (I’d used up the kid’s library). And then Georgette Heyer, loaned by a friend when I was confined to bed with a bug. Some Denise Robins was in there, I think. And the classics, Walter Scot, R L Stevenson — they all had some romance.
Genre came later — after I’d read an article about Charlotte Lamb and Anne Hampson and wanted to do it myself!