Smart Bitches Trashy Books | All of the romance, none of the bullshit.

I’ve actually lost track of the number of people I’ve hooked on romance using Lord of Scoundrels.  That book is Pure Crack.

Georgette Heyer novels are other great reads to introduce sceptics to romance. Great writing, thorough research and not far off from your favourite Austen, only with more adventure!  I do wish they would do something about those craptascular covers, though. If you want to give the questionable reputation of romance the boot, it is time for new cover designs!

Perhaps she should have read some newer Crusie—after all (correct me if I’m wrong) but weren’t Anything But You and Getting Rid Of Bradley written as category romances?  Which are, by definition, going to have a rather narrower set of parameters than single titles.  Send her Bet Me!

Malika, to which Heyer covers are you referring?  They’ve been re-issued so many times a straw poll of a dozen readers would probably turn up different cover art on each copy.

She’s still got a bit of the “Oh JesusGOD I can’t believe I’m reading this AND enjoying it,” about her, but damn, how cool.

Whoo Hoo!!!  And another one sees the light.  I’m glad she was open-minded enough to give then a try.  Romance novels will not be for everyone, but just getting those who bought into the stereotype and see that rather there are so many well written thought provoking, issue oriented romance novels change their mind and ‘see the light’ is a wonderful thing to hear about.

Cat Marsters: Actually, i was referring to romance novels in general, though i see i wasn’t clear in my last post. I actually like the recent re-issues of Heyer novels, which are rather tasteful. A friend lent me the following edition of These old shades,
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/0099465825/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=283155&s=books

It manages to capture the seductive and frothy aspect of romance novels far more than the technicolor gold-leaf editions of romance novels you are used to seeing in the bookshop. Then again, what would we get to bitch about if romance covers became tasteful? Be careful what you wish for etc..; )

Roberts does sound rather hesitant, but at least she lets herself be seen out in public with them instead of wrapping them in brown paper before leaving the house!

Obviously I have my grump on so I apologize in advance.

I’m always happy when people discover that romance books can be good reading but why do so many newbie readers want to start by making changes to the genre?  There are many types of romance writers and an even larger variety of romance readers. We have room in romancelandia for all types of people including the not-so-sharp, the not so literal and the not so educated.

Some of us would rather stick pins in our eyes then buy a a ‘fun beach read!’.  That table won’t ever have me looking for my next TBR.

The ‘swirly pink font’ tells us ‘Historical’.  Personally I like that my favorite authors take their characters (and more importantly, their work) seriously.

And why do I so often feel that some critics would prefer romance books to come in plain brown wrappers? I think Chase’s cover is lovely. The point would be that one woman’s cheesy is another woman’s insta-buy.

You know, Joanne, some of those same things had occurred to me, reading through her email.  To me, Crusie is no more a quote/unquote beach read than Jodi Picoult.  But then, you know, whatever floats someone’s sandy shores read, right?  What’s interesting to me about reading her email is her questions with respect to things that those of us familiar with the genre take for granted, such as the nature of the cover art and font or that books that began life as category romances are sometimes going to have a startling similarity especially from the same author (which I think is sort of a danger of repackaging some of those books as ST).

But I was heartened by what she did enjoy of the books she read because it really gives me hope for the future of the genre and in drawing new readers in.

Lord of Scoundrel gets them every time. She should read Lisa Kleypas. She wouldn’t leave her house until she read all of Lisa’s titles.

One question, how does Loretta not take her characters seriously in LOS?

One of Rebecca Roberts’ points struck me as particularly apt—that about genre lines being blurred.  I’ve thought for some time that many, many readers are romance fans without even realizing it ( and some would undoubtedly deny it with their last breath.)  Nearly all mystery, suspense, urban fantasy, and action/adventure has a love story of some sort, often secondary to the main plot, but still a substantial part of the overall story arc, and many of the “classics” do as well.

I think the whole “fun beach reads” vs. “romance” thing is a genre/category issue.

I found this blog through the Bujold fandom :)  so I’m a die-hard Science Fiction and Fantasy Fan. And one of my favorite authors in that genre-as-it-is-now is the late (lamented) Andre Norton. Who, as one of my compatriots noted, had written more novels in the different facets of the genre than anybody else….

We realized that she (yep—Norton was her penname) was spread so widely because she was writing the books she wanted to write, and telling the stories she wanted to tell, before the genre’s definitions and expectations were set.

Which I think is part of the issue here. Most contemporary romance doesn’t do anything for me… I like romance in my adventure novels, rather than adventure in my romance novels—and I think that’s an issue of a sliding scale. A very personal sliding scale, one that’s very different for each of us.

An entertaining letter despite the lingering whiff of condescension.  The problem will be keeping new readers by making sure they access the good stuff.  A couple eye-rolling romances in a row is enough to turn anyone but the most dedicated of us off to the genre.

Because of this lovely blog, this fantasy-reader now enjoys a romance from time to time, and it’s just like Rebecca says: chocolate doughnuts.  Constantly, it might get tiring, but every so often, nothing else will do.  When I know I just need to lose myself for a day or two, I’ll go find one o’ these so-called “trashy books.”  ;)  I actually like my books gritty, political and angsty with bittersweet endings, so it’s been really refreshing to mix it up a bit lately.
(Though, in all honesty, I’m probably a book whore at heart and just like a good read, and I trust the smairts of the ladies that write and read this here blog.)

To Barbara: Great points about Norton and the sliding scale of genre.  And, I too, like romance in my adventure, rather than adventure in my romance.

Turning readers one romance at a time.  LOVE it.

Chase and Crusie FTW! They won me over, so I use them mercilessly on unsuspecting anti-romance people. I do think the newer Crusies work better, though—Welcome to Temptation and Bet Me are pretty surefire weapons, even on men.

And one of my favorite authors in that genre-as-it-is-now is the late (lamented) Andre Norton. Who, as one of my compatriots noted, had written more novels in the different facets of the genre than anybody else….

Barbara, I cut my SciFi teeth on Norton’s books and I still own almost the entire set of her Witchworld series (I lost track in recent years when she had co-authors). The Beastmaster was my first crush.

I need to find the article I read stating that almost every genre and book out there has some element of romance in it. *staples sticky note to forehead as a reminder*

It’s nice to know that even “an NPR snob (redundant!)” can come to the “pink” side!

Not that I ever need any encouragement to read romance, but I have somehow managed never to read Lord of Scoundrels, despite having received a billion and six recommendations to do so.  I finally caved in and ordered it.  I hold you lot entirely responsible for the overstretched state of my credit card. ;)

And yes, I always found Crusie and especially Heyer good for sucking people into romance reading.  And the new Heyer covers are wonderful.

I still love Andre Norton! Not only do I have almost *all* of the books she ever wrote, but that includes the YA, Romance, Western, Fantasy and Sci-Fi ones. Did I miss a genre? I think I did. Her “Sword” novels are action adventure (The Sword is Drawn, Sword in Sheath and At Sword’s Point).

At this point, I am still missing a few of her books: “Caroline” and “Day of the Ness”, “Star Ka’ats and the Plant People”, among others. It’s been a labor of love to get them… people on E-bay are selling old books of hers for $300.00 and up. :P Not even first editions! The most I’ve paid for one of her books was $30.00 for one of her Westerns, “Stand to Horse” and $25.00 for an old YA, “To Ride the Green Dragon”- not fantasy, sadly.

This is totally beside the point, but I can’t take it any more. What is the man in the Dreamspinner ad curious about? A blue man peering down at himself as if to say “what is that dangly thing I’ve got downthere”. The books may be good but that ad is just strange.

She’s come to the dark side… now we must give her cookies. lol

Well done! I always love forcing intellectual snobs (like my mother and pretty much anyone I went to college with) to read romances and love them. I’m sad she chose category Crusie instead of Faking It or Bet Me, though—I imagine she might’ve had a different reaction.

The Loretta Chase thing, obviously, is the huge win. I can’t believe I’ve never read Lord of Scoundrels. At this point, it’s almost a contest to see how long I can hold out in the face of everyone in the universe telling me how freaking amazing and awesome it is.

Wow.  Despite some of the little comments, this woman scores points with me for four major concessions.  1) She admitted to a previously snobby attitude about romance.  2) She was willing to give romance a shot.  3) She not only dismounted from the high horse to read the books, but did so with an open mind.  4) She admitted to really enjoying a genre she previously scorned.

So many times, an anti-romance snob picks up a book and reads it only to purposely find reasons to prove she was right.  Roberta read for the experience.  Good for her!  Good for SB for turning her on to them.

The ‘swirly pink font’ tells us ‘Historical’.

Hey, I’m a romance reader and I really dislike the swirly pink font. But I suppose that’s more a matter of taste than genre, since I’m not a big fan of swirly pink fonts anywhere or figurative representations on my book covers, regardless of book or genre.

Wish I would have heard that interview, o so long ago. Thanks for the link.

I can’t believe I’ve never read Lord of Scoundrels. At this point, it’s almost a contest to see how long I can hold out in the face of everyone in the universe telling me how freaking amazing and awesome it is.

(Psssst…I’ve never read it either so we might be having this contest against one another!)

Leslie Dicken and Caty M: Oh, I hope you get to it soon. It is a marvelous reading experience. Do let us know what you think when (I’m optimistic here) you finally read it!!

I had a love affair for Norton in my adolescence. I LOVED her Witch World books. Sadly, I tried reading them about a year ago and couldn’t get past page 10 of the first book. I’m terribly sad, as I have all these lovely memories of reading her, but for me, she just didn’t travel well into my 30’s. I was going to post all my Norton books on bookswap.com, but now I’ll check them first to see if any are selling at a premium.

longer92: Leslie and Katy-don’t wait longer than 92 days to read Lord of Scoundrals.

ETA: I meant paperbookswap.com. duh.

Hehehe…romance slowly conqueering the world, one reader at a time. Congrats for pimping well done Sarah :-D

Pssst, Leslie Dicken and Louisa Edwards, shall we be the Three Musketeers? I haven’t read it either.

*bwahaha* Spamword: easy32 Yeah, I easily have at least 32 books in my TBR pile.

Wow, good choices for recommendations!

I wish she would have read “Bet Me” first.  I think it is a much better book.  ABW/GROB never did much for me.

I think I must be the only person in the world who had mixed feelings about LoS. I loved the first half, and didn’t care for the emotional angst re: the illegitimate child. Give me more fun sparring, less overwrought emotion any time (which is probably why I love Georgette Heyer like whoa). And please don’t throw anything at me.

Crusie and Chase are hard to resist, so it’s not surprising that she has finally come over to the pink side.  I’m glad she was able to keep an open mind.

But I hope she doesn’t give up on Crusie because she thinks her books are all the same—at the very least she should give Welcome to Temptation and Bet Me a chance, because those books are certainly not the same book.

Add me to the list—I’ve not read Lord of Scoundrels either.  Chase was a fairly recent discovery for me, and I’m trying hard not to NOM NOM NOM her backlist, but instead to savor each book.

I’ve also not read any Crusie.  My first awareness of her wasn’t very positive, I’m afraid, but I have her on my list to read some day.

I do like chocolate doughnuts, Georgette Heyer, NPR and intellectual snobs who have the sense to know that’s who they are.  I know several very intelligent women who assume (from a few category or historical experiences back in the day) that they wouldn’t enjoy romance novels.  It is nice to see them learn otherwise.

I love that her female leads are unapologetically delighted by sex.  I love that the male leads find that hot, not suspect.

Get this woman a copy of Mr. Impossible, stat!  My memory is rusty but I know there’s a passage where he’s specifically, consciously relishing the heroine’s voracity and his ability to take whatever she gives.

...the fact that the author seemed to not take herself or her characters too seriously…

Again:  Mr. Impossible!  Lord of Scoundrels is Chase’s second-best work, for my money.

I will confess to discovering Lord of the Scoundrels here thanks to Doc Turtle’s ongoing review. Historicals are not normally my genre, but this was one damn good read.

Huh. I read Lord of Scoundrels and simply didn’t care for it. (I loved Mr. Impossible, so it’s not Chase). If that had been my first romance, I might not have stayed. I never understood why everybody adores it so much, but hey, we don’t all have to be the same.

My first was SEP’s It Had To Be You. Still on my keeper shelf going on ten years later.

And the Chase-Crusie tagteam claims another victim! ;-)

I realize that there are people here who were not all that enchanted with “Lord of Scoundrels”. Those who haven’t read it yet—what are you waiting for? I believe it’s the best romance novel ever written.

I give away copies of “Bet Me” to those who claim they don’t read romance, too. It’s too bad we can’t get a bulk discount. After all, we’re winning them over, one reader at a time!

-S

That is about the coolest thing EVER. I haven’t read Lord of Scoundrels but I’m going to my local indie bookstore RIGHT NOW to get it!

That does it, I’m reading Lord of Scoundrels next.  I’ve been reading romance 20+++ years and have never read Loretta Chase, thinking her books too Regency light *blech* for me.  After seeing Doc Turtle and others at SBTB enjoy it so much,  I went ahead and bought it, but it’s never interested me enough to start.  It’s now moved to the top of my TBR *hope I love it as much as everyone else*.

Wow, I don’t feel so bad about not reading “Lord of Scoundrels” now. I read Not Quite a Lady and loved loved luuurrrved it. Mr. Impossible is on my 505, to be read. LoS isn’t available as an ebook yet though :(

Spam word: because 54 - Because 54 people told me to read it!

Hmmm, Jessica.  I’m sure I read Lord of the Scoundrels on my e-reader.

this is so funny.  i recently had someone ask me to recommend a romance novel to them.  the first thing i told them was Lord of the Scoundrels and then every Laura Kinsale they could get their hands on.

One of Rebecca Roberts’ points struck me as particularly apt—that about genre lines being blurred.

This is one of the reasons I really dislike libraries moving to shelving by genre. It is sometimes hard to guess where a book will land. I just don’t see most of Evanovich’s work as mysteries but that is where my library shelves them.

It seems very limiting to place a genre label. There are some many works that cross the boundaries. But readers often won’t look at a genres they don’t read.

Chase’s Mr. Impossible was the romance that brought me over to the dark side, and is still my favorite of hers even over LoS (though that comes in second of her books).

As a converted former snob, I didn’t find what Roberts said offensive. You gotta remember, she’s only just been introduced to the idea of GOOD romance novels, as opposed to years of the old “romance=stoopid”. It takes time, and I think she’s definitely on a positive road.

Cheers for SBTB!

VW: read33 - Pfft! Only 33?

A friend of mine who would probs win the prize of intellectual snob of Europe, asked what i could reccomend her. Unfortunately, i only had a thin Barbara Cartland paperback ( Not my favourite by any means) with me at the time, but gave it to her, thinking she would toss it aside after a few pages. Imagine my surprise when she called me two days later saying she devoured the whole story in one sitting! As long as people are receptive, it will become obvious what the attractions of romance are. ( Though the Barbara Cartland reeling-in was a fluke )
What intellectual snobs often don’t realize is that just because you read romances, it doesn’t shut out the possibility of you being interested in anything else.

My husband likes the Crusie/Mayer books. He was also into LKH’s Anita Blake in the early days.

Sometimes, whilst in the bookstore, I have trouble finding books because they’re not in the romance section, but in the Sci-fi or Fiction sections.

Personally, this was my favorite bit of the email:

Subject: Turning an NPR snob (redundant!) into a romance reader

LOL!

Also, two or three books does not a convert make. I think she’s off to a good start. I agree with the general consensus the two Crusies picked were not the cream, but Fast Women was my first Crusie and it’s the one I’ve made it my personal mission to make EVERYONE’S first Crusie, Welcome to Temptation being a photo finish second.

As for this: “I am telling you, Lord of Scoundrels needs a special title for being a most effective tool in the “Bring Them Over to the Romance Side” arsenal.”, how about: Weapon(s) of Ignorance Destruction?

Ooo! Or maybe: Better Living Through Heaving Bosoms?

I feel like I should turn in my Romance Reader membership card, since I did NOT like or even finish Crusie’s “Bet Me,” so if that had been my first romance novel, I would not have been impressed. I also did not enjoy the ending of “Lord of Scoundrels.” Just didn’t like it.

“Anyone But You” was rather cute, and I looooved “Getting Rid of Bradley” (my first Crusie), so clearly romance readers are not a monolithic entity with the same novel pleasing everyone. How this adds to the conversation, I’m not sure, but when introducing people to romance novels, I can definitely see even the most sure bets failing to entice the newcomer.

when I tell people how I came to start reading books in the romance section, it always starts with “it’s all Georgette Heyer’s fault!”  I picked up a Heyer novel in the library due to the recs of sff authors (Lois McMaster Bujold, Pat Wrede, Sherwood Smith..)  I then systematically devoured each and every Heyer the libraries in my area had to offer.  when I ran out of books, I tore my hair, combed the aisles and came upon a Lisa Kleypas novel (It Happened in Autumn).  now the Heyer copies I read were all ancient library bindings, so if I had a preconception while reading them it was historical fiction.  but I looked at the Kleypas, thought ‘sheesh same elements’ and read it.  then read every Kleypas I could find, and never looked back! so hooray for Heyer and Kleypas!  *g*

LoS is insane, insane, I say!

I DLed it a while ago, but the mention here made me decide to start it, and it’s like crack. I have out of town guests—must clean, I have a book to review for Amazon Vine—must read, I have dogs—must walk,, I have a grandmother who lives with me—must converse, I have a husband—must kiss *his* prominent nose on occasion.

I’m at 76% and it won’t leave me alone—even as I try to ignore it, it calls to me.

It should be driving me nuts, because Jess really wants to fix him, and he really has been a jerk to her, and yet…

*Sigh*

And now I’m done. :)

Polly- I am with you on Lord of Scoundrels. Although I think that it was less the illegitimate child angst (though not my favorite trope) that lessened my enjoyment of the second half than that the clueless bewilderment of the hero (so delightful early on) began to wear thin.

KB- I agree that the genre shelving in libraries can be a problem. But it is also helpful for patrons dedicated to a particular genre when they are looking for new authors. Of course, at our library romances (with the exception of the Harlequin/Silhoutte categories) are blended in with the rest of the fiction titles. And some authors, like Evanovich, are shelved in both Fiction and Mystery.

So I finally read Lord of Scoundrels. In two sittings.  And yes, it was great.  Not flawless, but pretty damn good.  I read Mr Impossible too, and enjoyed it a lot, although I didn’t think it was as good as LoS. 

And now I have to find time to read my way through yet another author’s backlist.