Jun

25

Book ‘Em: Isn’t It Romantic?

Posted by Christopher Waldrop

June 25, 2007 |

I don’t read romance novels, but when an issue of Romance Sells, which says, “Published Quarterly for Booksellers and Librarians” on its front cover, came across my desk, I couldn’t help taking a few minutes to check it out. At a time when most other print genres seem to be either stagnating or dying, the romance genre is thriving. And maybe it could teach all those stuffy literary types a thing or two.

It might not have anything to do with the success of romance novels, but romance publishers obviously value libraries and librarians. The first full article, on Page 3, is “Choice Reads” by Michele Drovdahl, 2006 RWA [Romance Writers of America] Librarian of The Year.

Did I read that right? The Romance Writers of America association picks a librarian of the year? The magazine is also sponsoring a “Libraries Love Romance” contest, and the Summer 2007 issue also profiles Linda Keller, who is Community Relations Training Manager for Barnes & Noble, their 2007 Steffie Walker Bookseller of the Year, and Valerie Luna, a librarian in the Spotswood (New Jersey) Public Library, their 2007 Librarian of the Year.

Beyond this it’s little more than a catalog, but the diversity of books classified as “romance” is surprising. Sub-dividing the genre into Anthology, Contemporary Series, Contemporary Single-Title, Historical, Inspirational, Paranormal, Romantic Suspense, Women’s Fiction, and Young Adult releases, it’s clear romance ain’t just about bodice-ripping.

Granted there is still a pretty substantial amount of that. Fabio may have moved on, but there are ample replacements. Shirtless men grace the covers of titles in every section, but there’s a fair amount of female skin on display too. Could romance be a guy’s genre too? Most guys might not admit it, but, hey, why not? And while it’s wrong to judge a book by its cover, there are a fair number with tasteful, even artfully done covers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In all the creative writing classes I’ve ever taken romance fiction is always sneered at. It’s the ultimate sell-out. And yet I have to appreciate the Romance Writers of America for their support of libraries and librarians, and for promoting the written word. Every genre has its greats and its not-so-greats, and some of the greatest works in literature are romances. Many of Shakespeare’s comedies, such as Much Ado About Nothing or The Comedy of Errors are extremely well-written romances, and, while this fact is often overlooked, Homer’s Odyssey is, at heart, a love story (even though Odysseus leaves a few broken hearts in his wake). Why look down on romance? Every age has its critics who complain that nothing good’s being done, and yet generations to come always find diamonds in the rough. And, bad or good, as the magazine’s title says, romance sells.


Comments

4 Comments so far

  1. Content Quake Network Notables for June 28th : Content Quake on June 28, 2007 1:14 pm

    [...] And Just Write asks, “Isn’t It Romantic?” [...]

  2. Little Miss Know it All on June 28, 2007 5:43 pm

    Personally, I love a good romance, but I HATE being caught in the romance section. I don’t like the kind of romances you can figure out from the first page–those annoy me. But I do love a good Diana Gabaldon. Of course, her novels are as much action and history as they are romance–romance is really a side story–but still, they fall into the romance section. Hey, how many romance series can claim to be 900 plus pages long each, each bestsellers, each pageturners? Give me another dram and a new Outlander, please!

  3. Christopher Waldrop on June 29, 2007 10:34 am

    Nine-hundred pages? Obviously romance ain’t for sissies!

  4. John on July 2, 2007 9:30 am

    Whoah, who’s the bird in “Blaze”?

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind

<< Post Navigation >>

« « Go Go Goths. | Palaeolithic Genius. » »