Posts
Sharon Leach wins Pretentious Biotch of the Week Award. She smugly wrote:
I suppose I can understand romance novels being recession-proof, in theory. Women, the biggest consumers of the genre (and also the writers) love escape fantasies. Harsh economic times would perhaps send women scurrying further into that good abyss of un-reality. They're afraid they'll lose their jobs, their kids are driving them around a hairpin bend, and their husbands, bless them Lord, are themselves worried about keeping the family afloat, so intimate relations may often not, well, rise to the occasion. The answer: live vicariously. Read a book about some hottie who's ripping off the heroine's bodice.
I sort of get that.
Only, I don't. Not really.
Oh, I tried it. Well, okay. I didn't buy a bodice-ripper. I haven't been able to stomach one of those since high school. (How do grown women read them without a trace of irony? We know real men are NOT like the heroes of romance novels.)
You've just insulted your many readers who understand what the genre is about. Try reading a good romance book before you start throwing out thirty year-old cliches. Bodice rippers, indeed--your age is showing.
Grrr. No time to rant more. Have to get back on a roof to sweat off snotty women who always come off attacking their own through their cluelessness.
Bear with me while I learn. The first button likes the POST. The second button likes the BLOG site. Please help me by "liking" me. Thanks!
8 comments:
Oh, she's an author? Never heard of her. My bad. What's her name again? Never mind. I'm off to read a romance.
Wow! Yeah...just wow. Her snottyness is impressive. Does she give lessons? She could make a mil teaching us dumb readers about bodice ripping romance... LOL! **rolling my eyes here***
Good rule-of-thumb: don't write about what you haven't researched and don't understand. Another: it destroys your credibility when you admit that you haven't read what you're attacking.
As for reading to "escape," I do it all the time. Romance, fantasy, science fiction, mystery - it gives me a break from the real world. What's wrong with that?
It's been awhile since I read anything quite so patronizing.
I wonder if the original article in US News and World Report actually used the phrase "bodice rippers?"
Ferah,
LOL. She's a writer, denigrating other writers making a living, just as she does. Stupid woman.
***********
Lisa,
It just makes me growl because these women's assumptions are so old-fashion and whacked-out. Do they not even know how all the genres are mixing into exciting stories now? Do they even care that, of all fiction, the romance genre traces our sex's journey/growth since the 30s? Of course not. They're stuck in their swamp of cliches. Bah.
Vince,
You'll be surprised how many writers (reporters) use the term bodice-rippers in reference to romance books. Never fails--every romance convetion being held in any city will bring out that term and the snide remarks.
I'm not saying that there aren't good reporters/writers out there who try to give a fair view of the genre today, but they still use this term to encompass the entire range. It's public perception, of course...we do it to many different things too.
But it BURNS me when a female writer does it to their own, dismissing readers AND those who practice the craft in sweeping generalizations, as if those who write or read romance are just wasting their time.
Pardon me, Ms.Snot, but I think your prejudice is showing. Yes, I'm in a ranting mood. :-P
Eww... I saw that article earlier today. Smug, snotty, clueless. But wait. What's that? You're missing one from the checklist there. Ironic.
She's one of the contibuting authors to a Reggae-Jamaican themed fiction anthology. What was the blurb for it... Let me think. Oh yeah.
"From the old lady who gives a "how to" speech on beating children, to the schizophrenic singer who thinks he's Bob Marley, to the hotel maid who gets a sexual offer that she can't refuse, the diverse mix of characters are linked by the fundamental principle that all cliched conventions must be shouted off the page. "
Did you catch the hotel maid part? I guess it's just a conventional cliched bodic-ripping moment when anyone else writes it. Mmmm-hmm... Yep. Irony. Granted, she does attempt to justify it.
"The selections seek to entertain while asking daring questions that provoke new ideas into being."
Yep. Still ironic, but ten times more clueless.
hmm... finally read the article. i feel the same way she does about candace bushnell's writing, its pretty bad. loved satc and picked up one of her books, never got past the first chapter. i also feel the same way about old school romance novels from the 80s absolutely hated 99% of them. but then that was the 80s and im thankful every day that i didnt have to be an adult woman yet then, would have been even more frustrating than it is now to me. now i see how she was trying to use sniping humor and as i use it myself and am not actually a romance writer (though i am a reader) i get that, but she did make an ass of herself by not actually reading a modern romance novel. that isnt to say that there isnt still some not that readable stuff out there, cuz there is, and while mysteries are more formulaic than romance you do know its going to end happily... regardless youre right jenn, the genre does map how far we've come, and its nothing like it was in the 80s or earlier. allll that being said, i am only just getting over my feeling of discomfort at being seen picking up a book, and its only because i lurk on here and see what other not-pathetic women (and men vince!) read the genre that i am confidently picking up the books and standing in the aisle. that isnt to say that i dont make sure that i tuck the makeout covers under a more normal looking cover cuz i think ill always do that (wish they'd stop putting those on there!) but im slowly becoming a proud reader. thanks jenn and all y'all ;)
Post a Comment