I've got a few things on my mind...and so I thought it would be fun to open up a discussion. If no one wants to play, that's fine. But I hope I have a few takers that want to share their thoughts and opinions. If you want to answer on your own blog, you can. But leave a link. Or you can just share your thoughts in the comments. But I really am curious as to what YOU think.
First set of questions....What do you expect out of a romance?
Are there things you're pleased to see?
Are there things that turn you off in a book?
Do you judge romance in the same way as you judge other books?
Do you expect historical romance to be mostly accurate to the times in which they're set? Or are you fine with modern characters playing dress up?
Second set of questions....What do you expect out of a literary variation (prequel, sequel, retelling)?
What do you expect out of an Austen-inspired variation?
Do you embrace these variations? Approach them with skepticism? Avoid them altogether?
Have you ever been surprised by one?
My thoughts--What do you expect out of a romance?
I expect (hope) to find a balanced story: characters, story, love/romance/smut. I like a balanced approach: the hero and heroine fully developed, interesting dialogue that isn't of the drag and drop variety. (You know the kind where you could replace the names of any two characters and play switcheroo with scenes and insert them into other books without blinking an eye. They all look the same. They all talk the same. They all act the same). The best kinds of love scenes are where the characters are so thoroughly themselves, so unique that it's
all about them and not so much about what they're doing or how they're doing it. They stay in character. Otherwise you've essentially got nameless/faceless/characterless individuals having sex. And the story. It should have a story. It doesn't have to be a serious story. Or a dramatic story. It could be lighthearted. It could be serious. It could be funny. It could be touching or tragic. It could be a parody. It could poke fun at itself or the genre. It could be silly. The story could revolve around anything--a ball, a dance, a party, a vacation or trip, shopping, a misunderstanding about hats, whatever. But something needs to be going on outside the sex scenes. There are thousands and thousands of romance novels out there. And some I've enjoyed. Some I haven't. Some I thought were more tasteful than others. Some suited me. Some didn't. Some I thought were better written than others. But I've read at least a hundred or so (maybe more) through the years so it's not like I've no experience with the genre.
Are there things you're pleased to see?
My favorite romances are historicals. Especially historicals set in Regency England. Though other time periods can be fun too. I tend to like British settings more than American ones.
I love witty dialogue. Dialogue that sparkles and shines. Dialogue that shows the tension/chemistry between characters. I like to see the relationship develop.
I want the hero to be written in such a way that the reader knows why the heroine gets all swoony when he enters the room. And this doesn't mean telling us how wonderful, how perfect, how sparkly he is.
I like family dynamics. The character needs to be seen relationally. Maybe with parents and a sibling or two. Maybe with a best friend or two. And the relationships don't have to be perfect, they can be strained or tense. But she needs to be feeling something, connected to others.
Are there things that turn you off in a book?
I don't like books where the characters aren't at least somewhat developed. I need to feel a connection of some sort with the heroine/hero. I want more than a flat, lifeless character.
Most of all, perfection can be annoying. Characters should be authentic, should be human. Either physically, mentally, emotionally, psychologically, some -ally there needs to be a flaw or two. Whether this humanity comes from within the character or without--maybe she's reacting to something going on in her life--a loss of fortune or status, an alcholic father, a mean stepmother, a jealous sister. Or maybe she's the jealous one. Maybe she compares herself to an older or younger sister--or cousin, or best friend. Maybe she grew up a tom boy and doesn't feel comfortable in silk and lace. Maybe she's scared silly by thunderstorms. Maybe she's clumsy on the dance floor. Maybe she's afraid of dogs. Maybe she lisps or stutters. But she has to have something that keeps her from being perfect (and lifeless).
Anyone else annoyed by love scenes where the women are so extraordinarily beautiful, perfect, flawless, breathtaking, gorgeous, amazing, and stunning?
Do you judge romance in the same way as you judge other books?
Yes and no. Do I expect romance to be as "literary"? No. But I expect developed characters, a plot, and good-strong-basic writing. I expect to be entertained. Maybe the prose won't sing off the page. Maybe there won't be phrases, paragraphs that you repeat to yourself over and over again--or post on your blog--because they are so beautiful, so haunting, so memorable. Can characters be memorable? Yes! Can these characters be your friends? Yes! Can you love a book so much you want to go back to it again? Yes! But I don't know of any that would be of the sort you'd hold up as 'literary-quality-that-belongs-in-the-classroom.'
Do you expect historical romance to be mostly accurate to the times in which they're set? Or are you fine with modern characters playing dress up?
I'm not horribly nitpicky here. Glaring mistakes will bug me. But if there are small mistakes here and there, I probably won't even notice them. What annoys me--in a way--is when characters have a twenty-first-century mindset but are dressed up and placed in other settings. As far as writers trying to mimic the language and style of speech, some can manage it. Some do horribly at it. Sometimes its better to just let that go. To tell a straightforward story. To not worry about being all flowery or descriptive. Don't try to be something you're not.
What do you expect out of a literary variation (prequel, sequel, retelling)?
There are several things to consider--in general--when it comes to fiction of this kind.
On the one hand, if the author (the original author) has wrapped up the book (the original book) neatly with a happily-ever-after ending, then the new author of this new book has a few choices...they can either go the route of introducing new conflict, new characters, and climb towards a new climax....or they can forget matters of plot and spend several hundred pages doing nothing in particular hoping that they can mimic the characters and/or literary style of the novel so closely that readers won't notice the lack of a plot. They'll just love being with these friends again. There is another option--one that is a frequent choice though it is a boggling one to me--use familiar characters written by famous (but-now-dead) authors and write erotica. After all, the original novels often lacked these bedroom (and not-so-bedroom) scenes. There is a market apparently for writers and readers to share together that explores these types of scenes and scenarios.
On the other hand, there are books where the author (original author) hasn't wrapped everything neatly up. The author has chosen to be more ambiguous, to leave things hanging, to leave questions answered. In this case, new authors can write how they envision the characters to continue on and progress were the action to continue off the page.
I expect a book to try--as best it can--to stay somewhat close to the original. Literary adaptations that have Elizabeth and Darcy having premarital sex--for example--anger me. To have Elizabeth act and behave like Lydia; to put Lydia's words in her mouth; to reduce her intelligent mind to such nonsense. The improper behavior. To have her forget herself, to have him forget himself. Both of their reputations. Neither one would do anything remotely scandalous or shocking.
That doesn't mean they should feel bound or limited. But they should try to keep it toned down a notch. Maybe not be so outrageously wild in their imaginings.
What do you expect out of an Austen-inspired variation?
I don't expect the writer to be Jane Austen. I don't expect her to try to channel Austen when she's writing. I don't expect her to match Austen's literary style or her wit. Just a teeny tiny smidgen of it is good. If she can capture just a small trace of the charm or humor (or both) then that's enough. What makes Austen likeable? Is it her focus on love and romance? Is it her focus on women's lives? Is it her focus on society? Is it her focus on class? Is it her focus on these often comical eccentrics? (Like Mr. Collins or Mrs. Jennings or Mrs. Bennet) Is it the fact that she was good at taking snapshots of her world? Of describing life as it was? Is it the fact that she develops so many characters all at once? Her books are never the story of one man and one woman falling in love. They are always so much more than that.
There will never be a sequel that can capture anything and everything Austen was...as a writer. But I think the best of the lot will try to be multidimensional. Maybe not as widely as Austen herself was. But more than just one-dimensional.
Do you embrace these variations? Approach them with skepticism? Avoid them altogether?
I always approach with skepticism. There are times when I'm pleasantly surprised. Times when I just love what the author has done. I love the story. I love the characters. I love the storytelling. There are times when I think it's just awful. I don't enjoy the book at all. It's not one of those things where I hate 98% of all the sequels out there. If I really and truly thought that there would never be exceptions to the rule, if I thought that I would hate each and every sequel no matter what, then I just wouldn't read them at all. It's the uncertainty of it. When I like them, I tend to really really like them. But when I don't. Then I feel strongly about it.
Have you ever been surprised by one?
Yes. I'm reading one now...Pemberley Shades...and I'm just loving it. I read Old Friends and New Fancies last week. Again, that one I just adored.
© Becky Laney of Becky's Book Reviews
