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

Microsoft has a big catalog of romance e-books up on their site, all in the Microsoft eBook format (.lit). (NOTE: site is getting a LOT of traffic and is slooooow).

Some folks are alleging that the linked files can be had for free, though you do have to get the Microsoft reader to actually read the files themselves. Others attest that there is a fee for each ebook, and links to various locations to purchase the ebook itself. Amazon listed A Knight in Shining Armor at $6.99 for the .lit version. 

I have not had any luck scoring myself a free ebook copy of any of the listed titles. I shall have to keep trying. Mwaahahaha.

That said, I confess myself still largely ignorant of the ebook world.  Anyone know if the featured authors, like Nora Roberts, Susan Elizabeth Phillips, Jude Devereaux, and Elizabeth Lowell gave their OK? Do they even have to have to give their permission to have their books encoded in a vendor-specific ebook format? And what do you ebookies think of the .lit file format itself? A complete flash in the pan, or the beginning of the MS-standard for ebooks in the future?

I love Ruth Wind. You should’ve seen me doing the Snoopy Dance when I found out she was returning to writing romance. Well, not that the Silhouette Bombshell line is a conventional romance line, but WOO HOO asskicking babes with strong romantic interests.

But this book? It’s good, don’t get me wrong, and I enjoy how the heroine, Kim Valenti, is actually competent for once, unlike the usual bumbling, wouldn’t-hurt-a-flea morons who litter the landscape of romantic suspense, blowing your mind with another retarded-yet-cutesy antic (like throwing the gun at the bad guy) when you least want or expect it--and when I say “blowing your mind,” I don’t mean in a good way, I mean the way a landmine rips the limbs off another innocent, unsuspecting Cambodian child.

Yeah, secret agent heroines: far too many of them are brain-dead weenies. But that’s a rant Mrs. Giggles has covered in detail. Kim Valenti: NOT a brain-dead weenie, which is good. This chica knows how to get the job done.

Sarah: Yeah, I got yer “disdain” right here. I got disdain for your weird bony ribs, your nasty flat hair, and your itchy-looking man-pelt. Not to mention your abnormally-long neck.

Candy: Look, it’s one thing to be stalking hot ladies while undead. It’s another to do it while so undead, your arms are decomposing.

Or do vampires get leprosy, too?

Sarah: There’s the obligatory extended-neck pose, the hot-colored background, the full moon, the shirtness dude. But she looks… bored. He’s not even looking at her carotid. He’s looking at her right boob like, “Oh, look. Another titty. And it’s not as big as mine.” (And are his nipples too high or is that a spot on the graphic?)

And she’s got this expression on her face like, “*Sigh* Go ahead. Bite my neck, whatever. Just don’t stain my dress.” These must be the two most underwhemled vampire romance protagonists ever.

Candy: Homegirl’s arching away with that look on her face because the dude? Has blood breath like you will not believe.

Sarah: “I am zee most handsome vampire in all zee world. Gaze upon my manly chestes hairs. Long to play the laces on my shirt like a lute, using only your teeth. But I do not want to suck your blood. I want to steal zee hair care products from your cabinet. Damn. I am the smooth.”

Candy: The only way this guy could look any more gay would be if you strapped a sparkly purple dildo to his head. Again, I blame Anne Rice.

Sarah: BWAHAHAHAHAH Hair of the Dog? Is that a less-than-flattering endorsement of the heroine’s looks? Metal-headed vampire Trent Reznor is cursed - to go back for more of Thorina’s blood to cure his hangover, cursing every step because she is so almighty ugly!

Candy: Colossus’ fey younger brother starts posing as a vampire to get more chicks. All he can snag is that one desperate high school senior with the wonky teeth, but he’ll take what he can get, thankyouverymuch.

Yes, that’s right: We’re going to put up YET ANOTHER sidebar item. This one’s going to be a collection of our greatest hits. Someone who’s new to the site can browse some of our best bitchery and get a feel for the site, while those of you who’ve been around for a while can re-visit old favorites and snicker away.

A lot of our bitchery is made extraordinary only because of the comments--my ramble about rape in romance is largely an incoherent mess, for example, but the people who contributed comments made it a lively and informative discussion. I’m also thinking of instituting a “best tangent” category because some of our best and funniest posts veered sharply off-topic, like that time we started ripping on the Thundercats and He-Man in a Covers Gone Wild entry.

So, what would you classify as some of our best articles/reviews/discussions? Here are some of the more memorable ones for us:

15 Things That Only Happen in Romances

Talking About the R Word

You Like Me! You Really, Really Like Me!

Defining Romances: No Ickiness, Please

Romance: It’s Only For Monogamous Hetero Couples!

You Read Like A Girl

Erotica = Literature, Romance = Formula. GOT THAT? (this is one of my favorites mostly because of E.D’Trix’s absolutely horrifying excerpt of a salmon-y sex scene she had to edit)

On A Wicked Dawn

The RWA will never link to this site...

Carpathian Madness (aka all Carpathian novels by Christine Feehan)

You’re shittin’ me. Please tell me you’re shittin’ me (a.k.a. The Big RITA Trainwreck)

The Contemporary Romance Drinking Game

Paranormal Romance Chit-Chat, now with Bonus Paranormal Drinking Game!

Man Titty Contest / Vote for your favorite haiku/ oh, literate tit!

Masturbation and fanfic and WOO DAMN loads of TMI in this entry so be warned (this makes the grade because of the spam haiku)

Post your suggestions in our comments, and we’ll trim this down so it’s a manageable 10- or 15-item list.

Fabulous reader Dr. Frantz, herself a professor of English and romance fan, brought this fabulous event series to my attention:

Conversations about Romance, an ongoing seminar at the Smithsonian.

Suzanne Brockman, Diana Gabaldon, Mary Jo Putney, Carly Phillips and Jennifer Crusie are each booked for a seminar to discuss their writing, and the host, Dr. Pamela Regis, interviews them with a book signing following each session. If the next session wasn’t 9 days after my due date, I’d be in the car driving to DC, no question.

What gets me is the description on the page itself:

Romance novels were created to celebrate women’s control over their own destiny, with the promise of enduring happiness at story’s end. The popular genre’s established pedigree includes such venerable writers as Jane Austen.

The form allows for tremendous latitude in expanding on the basic theme of the heroine and her man.... However, they all share an abiding sense of the heroine as the winning centerpiece.

“The heroine as the winning centerpiece?” “Celebrate a woman’s control over her destiny?” I am so on board with that.

Dr. Frantz also mentioned in her email to me, and on her LiveJournal that the session she attended with Suz Brockmann was fantastic.

I went to Suz Brockmann’s interview this week (drove all the way up from NC!), and it was just fabulous—although it was Suz, and she’s such a great person, it’s difficult to imagine it going any other way.  And while the whole evening was immeasurably improved by the dinner afterward with 20 fans, Suz, and her husband, I still think the interview itself was wonderful and worth attending.

What was truly great about it was that you’re in the Smithsonian, for heaven’s sake.  Surrounded by signs advertising classes about Opera and Native American Culture and Far Eastern China dildoes painted with flowers (not really), and all these “high culture” things, and then there’s conversations about romance novels in the same space, given the same attention and respect.

I thanked the woman in charge and she shrugged it off, but I thought it was important to recognize her for having the balls to put on a program like this.

I concur - it is so important to consider the development of the romance novel alongside all the high-academe topics such as the development of women’s rights in the 20th century. We certainly touched on this idea during the monster conversation about rape in romance.

But romance novels in the Smithsonian? I’ll have a grin on my grill the rest of the day - that is fantastic!