Howdy! If you saw me or Jane from Dear Author, Marcella White Campbell, or Kassia Krozser on the Today Show and are checking out our sites as a result, welcome! Nice to meet you!
As is the standard in tv, where there’s piles and piles of tape but the audience sees about seven or eight inches of it, our segment was probably pretty quick. But we were talking then and are here now to say that the stereotype of romance readers is wrong. Romance readers are smart, erudite, clever, and tired of being dismissed as undersexed, overweight frustrated women. I hope that our enthusiasm and love of romance came across. If you like romance novels as much as we do, we’re glad you’re here.
ETA: There is a link to the video online if you’d like to see it for yourself. My comments after I watched it for the first time are below - click the “more more more” for, well, more more more.
I just saw the Today Show segment in pacific time – I’m not sure why so much airtime was devoted to Sex & The City, though it probably is the most current and stylish representation of the romantic happy ending that’s familiar to folks outside the romance genre group. But Nora kicked ass, and if you saw those two ladies looking up at Patrick Dempsey and George Clooney, that was indeed Lisa Kleypas and Barbara Caridad Ferrer.
It just occurred to me that people who attend this conference might be more likely to have bubble-thought dreams of meeting Kleypas and Ferrer than Clooney or Dempsey. But anyway.
I was on and while I couldn’t hear what I said (I was in the lobby bar having begged a hotel employee to turn up one of the bar televisions) I think it was the part wherein I compared romance novels to really good sex. So let me tell you some of what everyone else said because they were much more awesome than I could possibly describe.
Jane started out by identifying herself and her profession (attorney, general mastermind of organization) and said that she reads romance because of the assurance of a happy ending, and that they all end in happiness and redemption. She was also the origin of the idea that the stereotypical romance reader is a myth – and that we are the typical romance reader.
Kassia Krozser was kickass. She talked about her favorite books, and about the powerful experiences found in romance novels. Marcella White Campbell’s interview was so good that I nearly had to sit down on the floor to keep myself from jumping up and down and doing a happy dance. She said that there’s something in romance for everyone, and between the beginning and the happy ending, there can be comedy, drama, fear, hope, triumph and that’s why she continually goes back to her favorite books: they stand up to rereadings and they never get old.
When I was about to go over for my turn, someone over my shoulder (I don’t remember who, I’m sorry) said something along the lines of, “When is someone going to say something about the sex?” So I said, “I will.”
So when I was asked, like the others, “Why do you read romance novels,” the answer I gave was that there’s no shortage of unhappiness in the news right now, that it’s so easy to become overwhelmed with bad news, and romance novels guarantee a happy ending, that every thing will work out ok. When asked to elaborate as to why I like the happy ending, why I like romance novels so much, I said, “Well, romance novels are like really good sex.”
And there you have the soundbite.
I’m bummed out that Jane, Kassia, and Marcella’s comments weren’t included because they were so very excellent. But the RWA Conference on the whole looked incredible – and the shots of the literacy signing, which raised nearly $60k, were impressive. Romance fans, I think, came across as excited, stylish women who are devoted to reading and to romance. It’s a slight change on the fumpy unsatisfied housewife theme, and I like the subtext of the updated reference to romance readers, brought about by the billions of dollars sold and the millions of books sold as well. I hope the update continues so that romance readers are more accurately represented for who we are, and how diverse and amazing our readership is. Happiness is never chic, but I think the perception of romance readers has once again improved.
by SB Sarah • Thursday, September 04, 2008 at 03:29 AM
From yesterday’s Publisher’s Lunch:
Creator and executive producer of the CSI television franchise Anthony Zuiker’s series of three suspense-thriller “digital novels” (every five chapters readers are given website codes to access two-minute films that bridge to the next five chapters) beginning with SQWEEGEL, about an former FBI forensic investigator who retired after his whole family was murdered but continues to work a variety of grim cases, to Brian Tart at Dutton, at auction, for publication beginning in fall 2009, by Dan Strone at Trident Media Group (world).
Variety says “Zuiker will write a 60-page outline for each book, then supervise a novelist who’ll turn it into a 100-chapter book. Zuiker will write and direct 20 “cyber-bridges,” the two-minute video segments that supplement the pages.”
Aside from the whole “supervise the novelist” thing that makes me think of James Patterson and not in a good way, is anyone else kind of befuddled by this announcement? Cyber bridge videos between chapters that mix vieweing and reading? What the huh now? Generally speaking, I read on the bus, and on the treadmill (thank you Kindle and your absolutely gi-hummuna-normous text size - all the better to bounce you with, my dear) and am nowhere near a video-enabled computer, much less with the patience to wait for my iPhone to load the video. I can’t say I’d be all excited for a book that ties me to a computer to view the video bridge - half the time reading is a break from the computer, not that I can stay away long, oh Internet, how I love thee. Seems overly complicated, but then, I’m often mystified by Facebook.
Does anyone else think this is a rather bizarre concept, or is this the Future of Reading, with YouTube on Your Kindle?
by SB Sarah • Wednesday, September 17, 2008 at 06:34 AM
Marianne Mancusi produced a 3 minute Better TV segment about Sherrilyn Kenyon’s new book - and big ups to MM because for three minutes and thirty seconds, the segment profiles Kenyon, her fans, her dedication, their dedication, the groups of people totally devoted to her books, and there’s a bit of me with my friendly neighborhood sinus infection in there, too, talking about fans who want to live in the worlds which writers create, and how extraordinary that is. It airs today in a bunch of markets across the US.
by SB Sarah • Friday, September 19, 2008 at 06:22 AM
What’s this? You need an excuse to bank your head in that nice head-shaped divot on your desk? We here at SB HQ are happy to assist, as is Zumie, who sent me these excerpts from her creative writing textbook, The College Handbook of Creative Writing by Robert DeMaria.
Excerpt the first, from page 16:
“Male-female relationships have become very complex since the so-called sexual revolution of the 1960s. Nowhere has the loss of tradition and structure in society caused more confusion than in the relationships between men and women. Romeo and Juliet may have had their problems, but they knew exactly where they stood and what was expected of them. Today’s proliferation of paperback romances may be an escapist reaction to the confusion, or even a simplistic way of dealing with the varieties of interpersonal problems. There are also, of course, many worthwhile literary works on the subject, most of them by women who have been writing with greater freedom in an atmosphere of liberation—writers such as Alice Walker and Cynthia Ozick.
But wait, there’s more! Excerpt the second, from page 20:
The broad literary spectrum ranges from the silliest kind of romance or comic book adventure to the works of such major literary figures as Herman Melville and Jane Austen. Some critics try to draw the line and create criteria for what they call true literature, as opposed to mere entertainment or downright junk. Drawing a precise line is always a bit arbitrary, and not really necessary. What we have is a continuum from the very trivial to the very important. Since the range is very wide, some of the material between these extremes can prove quite interesting without actually being worldshaking. What good fiction, poetry, or drama does for us is leave us with the feeling that our experience has been expanded vicariously and that perhaps we know something afterward that we did not know before. In other words, good literature has an impact that, in some way, changes the reader. Trivial literary entertainments such as thrills and romances and television dramas, however, cannot be dismissed with contempt. They have a role to play in the lives of many people, and many of the writers involved find such work a pleasant and profitable form of employment, though significance in such works is clearly minimal. Their aim is to thrill, chill, and titillate. Frank Lloyd Wright once described television as “chewing gum for the eyes.” It’s an excellent description of that medium and might also apply to most of our light literature. Chewing gum gives you a lot of action but no nourishment. Great literature, on the other hand, is full of emotional, spiritual, and intellectual nourishment.
I love the dancing tango of “Have I insulted you? Have I? No, how about now? How about now?” that DeMaria is playing here with that added dollop of piquant elitism. It’s not necessary to draw a line between the erudite and the junk (but romances are junk) and even romance has a role to play in the lives of their readers (ignominious fools though they are). Jesus fucknuts, what kind of self-absorbed superiority fix is this guy on in the quest to teach creative writing? Thrill, chill, and titillate in the absence of emotional, spiritual, and intellectual nourishment? MY ASS, SIR.
I bet he giggled when he typed “titillate,” too.
What an outrageous pity that this boneheaded statement is being used to instruct a venue of creative encouragement. Discouragement is more like it. Pass me a romance. Preferably a hardback. So I can aim it at his groin.
by SB Sarah • Friday, October 03, 2008 at 03:00 AM
Over here in the US of Holy Shit, we have a few problems. A few, big, huge giant, honking seven hundred billion dollar problems. Add to that a light-your-pants-on-fire contested presidential race (aren’t you glad I write a romance blog and not political punditry? I know I am) and you have one very exhausted Sarah who is more than ever grateful for every opportunity to take refuge in the “yes, it will end happily” world of the romance novel. The billionaires, they don’t lose their shirts or invest in sub prime mortgages in Harlequin Presents’ world. They don’t need no stinkin’ Dow. Their money is inherited and, since they’re worldy wise and brilliant, probably collecting more interest sitting in shoeboxes under the bed.
Anyway, over here, it’s crazy pants time. The election is a little over a month away, there’s debates on television (note: I think any candidate who does not answer the damn question asked of them should lose time to talk. There should be a moderator with time docking power, is all I’m sayin) and signs and ads everywhere, and the tension is only going to increase. Which leads me to my next question:
How do you feel about authors discussing politics? A few authors have emailed me privately with videos and links, and I’ve discussed the current presidential race over email with heaps of people, but more than once, I’ve had someone remark that they feel awkward saying anything on their blogs about the political situation. One author said she didn’t feel like she was in a position to get political: whereas it’s ok for actors to embrace activism, for authors of commercial fiction, it’s not ok at all.
My general reaction is, “Why not? Go for it. If you have something to say, say it.” Yes, it may alienate some readers. Yes, it may mean that people who don’t politically agree with you vow never to buy your books again! (Yeah, says I. Riiiight. I’ll believe it when I have access to their bookstore buying history.) Yes, it might raise a particular kerfuffle, but in the long run, these folks live in the same world I do and I am very curious as to what they think. But I mentally keep it separate from their work. They as people do a lot more in a day than merely writing the books I read. So of course they have things to say about taxes and war and expenditure and governmental oversight, etc.
But yet there’s that reticence. And I get it - I totally get it. But I am never comfortable keeping my own mouth shut because it might be better for someone else. John Scalzi agrees. When asked if fiction writers should write about politics, he replied:
The reader who believes a fiction author should keep his or her opinions to themselves is effectively (if generally unintentionally) saying “You exist only to amuse me. You are not allowed to do anything else.” To which the only rational response is: blow me.
I’m not going to hesitate to add my voice to the national dialogue on any subject just because someone somewhere might not be happy with what I have to say. And more to the point, I think it is bad and dangerous thinking for people to suggest that fiction writers should have to live in a black box of opinion.
[My apologies for not being able to remember who sent me that link. But you’re awesome!]
I concur heartily, and do want to hear what people think, or, at least, read about it. I think it’s a cousin to the Romancelandia culture of Be Nice Or Else that silences romance authors on the subject of politics when authors wish to discuss it - though obviously if you’d like to not talk about it, that’s totally understandable.
I’m always dumbstruck, though, by the idea that someone who sends me a video or web page that has to do with their political opinion often includes a “if you don’t support this person, I hope I didn’t offend you.” I am rarely offended if you disagree with me. Telling me I’m a horrible person with no moral compass because I disagree with you, well, that’s obnoxious to be sure. But disagreement itself isn’t offensive - just like offending someone isn’t the same as assaulting them (TM Robin). I hate that two people with different political viewpoints keep quiet when around one another because they might...disagree. Argue. Debate. Oh, shit, dialogue. That’s just terrible. Can’t have that. Holy crap.
So if you’re an author who is very politically exercised right now, do you keep silent on the subject? Do you keep your political commentary in a specific environment, such as your personal non-author-related blog? Does your political activism on your author blog extend to encouraging voting and political involvement but not discussions of a particular candidate? Does the relative prominence of your name as an author mean you’re less likely to be outspoken about your personal feelings about the current campaigns? Or do you prefer that romance be a politics-free zone, from the authors to their blogs?
What’s the fallout if an author you like takes a political stand that you don’t like, and really, does it matter? Is an absence of politics the only way to go when you’re trying to sell something, because we’re so polarized that alienating the sales base is bad idea jeans? What’s your take?
by SB Sarah • Thursday, October 30, 2008 at 02:52 AM
Bitchery reader Alyc writes:
This is more general than the regular HaBO, so it may not qualify. Here’s the deal: I’m a sucker for a good Eros/Cupid and Psyche retelling. My hazy memory tells me I have run across a few in my time, but the new version of the TV show has got me yearning to read a few good Cupid stories. I’m certain the readership here would be more than able to recommend some.
To narrow things down a bit, what I like about the story is the god/mortal dichotomy—pshaw! Who reads about Dukes when you’ve got gods to play around with? I also tend to prefer historicals over contemporaries, but I’ll dip my toes in contemporary waters for a good Eros and Psyche tale.
by SB Sarah • Tuesday, November 18, 2008 at 01:00 AM
The Smart Bitch Book needs a Smart Bitch Book Videomo*. And who better to make us wet our pants with laughter than the collective brilliance of The Bitchery?
*You’re probably asking yourself, “Self, what the fuck is a videomo?” Well, the answer, Self, is that it’s a pastiche of “video” and “promo.” Why not use the words Book + Trailer? Because “book trailer” is trademarked to Sheila Clover English, CEO of Circle of Seven Productions. So, Videomo it is. Sounds like Tony Romo, only not so much a Dallas Cowboy. And we doubt that any promo videos will date Jessica Simpson, though one never knows.
This is probably one of the bigger contests we’ve run, so get ready for a lot of explanation. The nutshell: you make a promo video about our book, upload it to YouTube and alert us to its presence. We collect all the entries on our channel, and showcase as many of them as possible as part of our Friday Video collections. A panel of Extremely Erudite, Intelligent, and Awesome people will select the winner, and the winner gets a holy shit huge prize package.
What’s a holy shit huge prize package? Behold:
Teh Winnah of the Videomo Contest will receive:
An Amazon Kindle
A $100 Gift Certificate to Amazon or the bookstore of Teh Winnah’s choice
A Laptop skin featuring The Ladies, the glamorous icon of Smart Bitches Trashy Books
The people’s ovation and fame forever.
Second place will win:
$50 at Amazon or the bookstore of choice
An iPod skin featuring The Ladies, the glamorous icon of Smart Bitches Trashy Books
A smaller but still sizable portion of the people’s ovation and fame forever
Contest Stuff:
All entries must be uploaded to You Tube by Thursday, January 1, 2009, midnight EST. If you make a Videomo for us while hung over from New Year’s Eve? Super Awesome!
Please use whatever you’d like to create your Videomo, from live action to visual puns to really, really bad poetry. BUT PLEASE: do not use anything that’s copyrighted or the property of someone else because, dude. Not Cool. If your Videomo features items that are not free for your, and therefore our, usage, your entry will be disqualified.
Videos will be showcased on Smart Bitches as Friday Videos, and visitors to the site and our YouTube channel are more than welcome to vote on the videos themselves using YouTube’s rating and comment system.
Winner will be chosen the week of 9 February 2009, and the winners will be announced on or within 48 hours after 14 February 2009. Happy Valentine’s Day - you can make love to a Kindle (ow).
International entries are welcome. We ship anywhere, except the space station. Sorry, folks on Mir.
Other Stuff:
Whichever video we select as Teh Winner becomes property of Smart Bitches Trashy Books LLC for use all up and down the internet. We may tattoo it on our buxom selves, even. Who knows? But please do feel free to place a credit for yourself at the end of the Videomo. Srsly.
The winning Videomo might be featured on the web site of our publisher, bookstores, who knows. So go wild. You don’t know where this thing will end up.
Need help? We’ll make book promotional materials available to anyone who asks for them, and we can answer questions and provide a big honking high-res version of our cover as well. Just email us at or , and put “Videomo” in the subject line.
We’re still finalizing the judging panel, but we’re looking to television and film production professionals, random people of awesomeness, and, of course, yours truly, the Smart Bitches, to select Teh Winnah. Our panel presently includes Jane from Dear Author, The Dynamic Duo behind RomanceNovel.tv, Marisa and Maria O’Neill, and Morgan Doremus from Miss Match Productions.
A website that reviews romance novels from a couple of smart bitches who will always give it to you straight. No bullshit. No gushing--unless the author really deserves it.
