A Fetherbed of Lies-Writerly

[JackLuis]

"Anyone can write a "Romance Novel" by Im a frayed knot

So I decided to research the writing of romance novels. I mean, really, how hard could it be to write one? They all seemed to be from a formula, and once I had that formula down, I should be able to crank them out with sufficient regularity to pay the bills. So I went out and bought a few random Romance Novels from the local grocery store. I was right - they are written to a formula that one could easily master and crank them out. But there was something else about them that prevented me from ever writing one.

Ms/r Knot goes on in the article to explain:

At the time, I was volunteering with homeless children and with a battered women's shelter. To work at the shelter, we had training about what constituted an abuser. I noticed that the grand climax of every one of these novels was a situation that would have been prosecuted as domestic violence. In other words, the most "romantic" part of the novel was abuse. In one case, he slapped her, she slapped him back, he grabbed her arm and had his way with her. For some reason halfway through she quit struggling and they had a fantastic night of sex. Excuse me? In another, it was alcohol. The one that bugged me most was one where a woman was being nanny to a widower's daughter in the outback. Nobody around for miles. When she finally got too frustrated for words, she tried to leave on foot. He somehow found her and LASSOED her! Then his horse kept her on the ground while he ran over to her and ... well, you know the rest. Whenever she would try to get up and get the rope off and run the horse would jerk her down. This is not romantic. This is violence.

Finally, I saw how women were portrayed. While it seemed that she was strong, she was really weak and helpless. Needy. Dependent. Unworthy of respect. He was strong. He seemed cold on the outside but it hid a wall of passion. Stereotypes from the 50s, and never really true stereotypes at that.

Is it true, or has she been reading poor writing?

 

[Boxlicker101]

I think it's mostly women who write this stuff and mostly women who read it. It's not meant to be realistic.

 

[JackLuis]

I think it's mostly women who write this stuff and mostly women who read it. It's not meant to be realistic.

True, but she's talking about it giving the impression that it is, and that impression lays in the back of the mind, to be recovered at the slap of a hand.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I think it's mostly women who write this stuff and mostly women who read it. It's not meant to be realistic.

True, but she's talking about it giving the impression that it is, and that impression lays in the back of the mind, to be recovered at the slap of a hand.

Sometimes I write first person stories about wives who are cheating on their husbands and post them in the Loving Wives category. I get emails and PM telling me how rotten those women are, and how I am such a rat for victimizing their husbands. I just smile about such responses.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Remember when we were all talking about Twilight, and how the dude was doing creepy shit like pulling the engine out of her car, and sitting in a tree witching her sleep, and it was supposed to be romantic?

 

[JackLuis]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I think it's mostly women who write this stuff and mostly women who read it. It's not meant to be realistic.

Sometimes I write first person stories about wives who are cheating on their husbands and post them in the Loving Wives category. I get emails and PM telling me how rotten those women are, and how I am such a rat for victimizing their husbands. I just smile about such responses.

I've written stories where women fuck with seemingly no motivations at all. It's crap, as TexRad says, but It's fun.

I'm trying to write a story where a 23 y old guy is supposed to teach an, just 18 y old, about women, he is assisted by four women,18-36 on a Camping trip.

The sex parts are easy, but motivating the women to cooperate isn't easy.

 

[JackLuis]

Remember when we were all talking about Twilight, and how the dude was doing creepy shit like pulling the engine out of her car, and sitting in a tree witching her sleep, and it was supposed to be romantic?

I must'a missed that, was that after the Hoover Administration?

But I'm not surprised when the author doesn't care what messages he sends, he just needs to satisfy a Producer, publisher, or editor. Of course it is hard to write and keep your mind open to the alternative interpretations of the unknown readers.

I have a hard time just typing decent English.

 

[JackLuis]

A truth to ponder.

http://chzhistoriclols.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/425733d7-2618-429a-93d3-5896d8b1f769.jpg

 

[Boxlicker101]

I've written stories where women fuck with seemingly no motivations at all. It's crap, as TexRad says, but It's fun.

I'm trying to write a story where a 23 y old guy is supposed to teach an, just 18 y old, about women, he is assisted by four women,18-36 on a Camping trip.

The sex parts are easy, but motivating the women to cooperate isn't easy.

In a lot of my stories the woman is the aggressor. She doesn't need any motivation, she just likes sex. Of course, the guy does too, so I don't worry about my characters wanting to fuck or whatever else they do.

BTW: Do you deliver porn on a bicycle?

 

[sunandshadow]

I've certainly read romance novels where the 'hero' was literally abusive and I started rooting for the heroine to kill him rather than fall in love with him. On the other hand, there are romance novels which are cute and funny and have no violence and heroes who aren't particularly pushy. I'd also disagree that they all follow the same formula - yes there are things that most romance novels have in common, but those things are a general pattern, not a detailed formula one could easily master and crank out like an assembly line.

 

[JackLuis]

In a lot of my stories the woman is the aggressor. She doesn't need any motivation, she just likes sex. Of course, the guy does too, so I don't worry about my characters wanting to fuck or whatever else they do.

BTW: Do you deliver porn on a bicycle?

As broke as I am, Sure if it pays enough.

 

[oggbashan]

...

Is it true, or has she been reading poor writing?

I think that she picked up the wrong pile of books.

It isn't true of the majority of Mills and Boon novels. In those the woman tends to be a reasonably strong personality. There is conflict in the plots, but it is emotional, not physical. If he takes her in his arms, she wants him to.

There are many sub-sets of romantic fiction, just as there are in action fiction. For example there is hospital fiction with doctor/nurse. He is usually the doctor, initially underestimating her skills until she shows him that she is supremely competent in a crisis, but it can be reversed with her as the doctor. There is also nurse/patient with him as the difficult case who needs persuading to help her to heal him...

Any real, non-consensual violence would be rejected by Mills and Boon, although before WWII they used to publish 'Sheik' type stories like the Rudolf Valentino films based on the books by E M Hull. But even they were formulaic - he abducts her, she civilises him, they live happily ever after.

Og

 

[3113]

Is it true, or has she been reading poor writing?

Take note that she starts the story "several years ago." So one has to ask, which romances did she read and how old were they? Romance was (and to some extents still is), porn for "ladies" who, back in the day, couldn't read or get their hands on real porn. Which is why it's no surprise that a big percentage of modern porn has some very pornographic sex scenes, many to the point where it's indistinguishable from erotica.

Because this is part of the point of Romance, it's no surprise that, like the porn here, it runs the gambit of sexual fantasies. It looks like this reader got the BDSM and Non-Con piles--both of which are very popular. But she could have just as well gotten the Erotic couples pile, or Mature or Interracial piles and found a very different formula and very different objections.

Many publishing houses rely on a formula for their romances. Others don't. And there are plenty of romances that are well written enough to have been labeled "Literature."

It's a big genre. What she said is true for a sliver of it, just as it would be true for a sliver of stories on this porn site.

 

[TxRad]

Sounds like she found the bodice ripping category.

Like 13 said, "Romance Novels" come in a lot of flavors.

 

[3113]

Just to emphasize, the writer is correct about these particular types of Romances, as "Twilight's" success points out. Women writer and women readers still cling to such myths (Jealousy = he loves you and "a good woman can change a man" etc.), society does for that matter. These are myths we want to be true and we hold to them because if we don't then we have to admit hard truths that are no fun. Like "he doesn't love me," and "I can't change him."

But that's human nature, is it not? We cling to a lot of bad myths because we prefer them to the truth.

 

[TE999]

Somebody's continuing to buy these novels or they wouldn't continue to be published in such profusion. Being PC or femisensitive doesn't seem to enter into it.

"No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." H. L. Mencken

 

[JackLuis]

So in less that 24 hours, we have let the air out of her thesis balloon.

However have we addressed the issue of violence standing in for actual motivation?

Are there issues we could address to counter the negative images of which she writes?

One issue I have, is that my protagonists are too 'nice'. In my attempts to to show a future where men 'care' for women, they end up pretty sappy, or so it seems to me.

Perhaps this is the result of what I have 'forecast', men will not be as strong and viral as "romance Men' have been portrayed.

 

[TxRad]

So in less that 24 hours, we have let the air out of her thesis balloon.

However have we addressed the issue of violence standing in for actual motivation?

Are there issues we could address to counter the negative images of which she writes?

One issue I have, is that my protagonists are too 'nice'. In my attempts to to show a future where men 'care' for women, they end up pretty sappy, or so it seems to me.

Perhaps this is the result of what I have 'forecast', men will not be as strong and viral as "romance Men' have been portrayed.

I don't think we let the air out as much as we pointed out that she didn't do enough research. In one example she talks about the outback like maybe she is Australian or the book was from there. Oz is still pretty rough and tumble and far less PC than here. So that might account for the more violent stories. They used to be that way here but have softened up over the years. JMHO.

If you soften the men up, then you can expect some sappiness. The genders are growing closer even today as far as strengths and weakness's go. I'm doing a novel based on a world where the governing is Matriarchal. The women are the strong ones and the males are breed to be docile. It takes some mental twisting to keep things straight.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I don't think we let the air out as much as we pointed out that she didn't do enough research. In one example she talks about the outback like maybe she is Australian or the book was from there. Oz is still pretty rough and tumble and far less PC than here. So that might account for the more violent stories. They used to be that way here but have softened up over the years. JMHO.

If you soften the men up, then you can expect some sappiness. The genders are growing closer even today as far as strengths and weakness's go. I'm doing a novel based on a world where the governing is Matriarchal. The women are the strong ones and the males are breed to be docile. It takes some mental twisting to keep things straight.

I'll say! Women were "Bred to be docile" for hundreds of years but it didn't work out so well...

What are you going to do about testosterone? it's a primary factor in aggressive behavior.

i was thinking about this recently in relation to many people's genetic background- my mother is the product of Russian serfs, and you'd think that I would have docility bred into my very bones. I ought to be a natural submissive. Same for so many folk who are the grandchildren of English servants, or low-caste Indian families, or innumerable European peasant societies...

 

[oggbashan]

... I ought to be a natural submissive. Same for so many folk who are the grandchildren of English servants, or low-caste Indian families, or innumerable European peasant societies...

Maybe for the others, but English servants - never!

The servant hierarchy was strong. Progression was for the toughest. Servility was killed off with the Black Death. A servant knew his or her place and would defend it against interlopers.

The pages of Punch throughout the Nineteenth Century are full of examples of unsubmissive servants. A Lady daren't enter her own kitchen without giving prior notice because she would upset the Cook, and that could have a disastrous effect on the family's meals.

The nobility recognised the role of their servants and generally treated them well, as fellow employees in the family's enterprise, and as friends. Many family photograph albums included the servants as a matter of course because the servants were important members of the wider family.

It was the middle-class, particularly the nouveau-riche middle-class, who didn't know how to treat servants properly and got poor service as a result until they had been educated by the servants.

Being a servant was a way for someone from a poor family to raise their status, to aspire to education and learning. It was hard work for long hours but the benefits were real - good, plentiful food, work clothing provided, and a cash income. For many girls, being a servant girl, even at the lowest level, was the first time that they had a bed of their own, possibly even a room of their own, with the right to privacy and dignity.

Servants might be deferential. That was the best way to progress through the hierarchy. They were not servile or submissive. If they were, they faced bullying by their peers, and possible contempt from their employers.

Og

 

[TxRad]

I'll say! Women were "Bred to be docile" for hundreds of years but it didn't work out so well...

What are you going to do about testosterone? it's a primary factor in aggressive behavior.

i was thinking about this recently in relation to many people's genetic background- my mother is the product of Russian serfs, and you'd think that I would have docility bred into my very bones. I ought to be a natural submissive. Same for so many folk who are the grandchildren of English servants, or low-caste Indian families, or innumerable European peasant societies...

I don't think women were breed to be docile but they were put and kept in a place of submission for a long time. We're getting to a place where that isn't as true as it used to be. Women might not necessarily be stronger or men weaker but both are more open and understanding. At least that's what I'm seeing in the younger generation for the most part.

I really haven't touched on testosterone but i really need to go back and make a point or two about it. Thanks for reminding me.

From what I've read, I don't think genetics have much to do with docile or submissive. I think it's more of a learned mindset. A way of looking at ones self. Introvert as opposed to extrovert.

Russian serfs were a hardy bunch, the land and the weather kept them from being anywhere near submissive. I agree with Og on the English servants. Low-caste Indians i know only a little about but there might be a case for submissive there. The Japanese culture comes to my mind when learned docile behavior is discussed. Too many people and not enough elbow room. Not being polite is not a good thing in those conditions.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I don't think women were breed to be docile but they were put and kept in a place of submission for a long time. We're getting to a place where that isn't as true as it used to be. Women might not necessarily be stronger or men weaker but both are more open and understanding. At least that's what I'm seeing in the younger generation for the most part.

I really haven't touched on testosterone but i really need to go back and make a point or two about it. Thanks for reminding me.

From what I've read, I don't think genetics have much to do with docile or submissive. I think it's more of a learned mindset. A way of looking at ones self. Introvert as opposed to extrovert.

Russian serfs were a hardy bunch, the land and the weather kept them from being anywhere near submissive. I agree with Og on the English servants. Low-caste Indians i know only a little about but there might be a case for submissive there. The Japanese culture comes to my mind when learned docile behavior is discussed. Too many people and not enough elbow room. Not being polite is not a good thing in those conditions.

I don't believe you could breed anybody to be docile. It's a learned trait. Neither baby boys nor baby girls are particularly docile; they are equally loud and demanding and self-centered. You can, however, raise them to be docile, and this was usually done with low-born women in some cultures.

Of course, if this is a science fiction story about some futuristic society, you can include gender assignment before a baby is even conceived, by having women take some kind of potion before becoming pregnant and something else to inhibit testosterone production while the male fetus is in the womb.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I young friend of mine wrote her NaNo novel with male and female roles reversed, and she simply ignored biology-- worked out okay-- plus she included a young man who was horribly ill-served by the social structure and was considered a vicious bitch by everyone around him.

What I found interesting was that he was NOT the main focus of the story.

 

[sunandshadow]

I saw an interesting video about the history of domestication of the dog, and one part was an experiment involving silver foxes. They wanted to domesticate silver foxes for fur production and possible pets. They took two groups of silver foxes and bred one group to be docile and the other to be aggressive. They did indeed see changes in the average personalities of the babies based on the breeding. They also saw physical changes in the docile fox group matching some of the physical changes we see in domestic dogs vs. wolves: Floppy ears, curly tails, retaining a more baby-like appearance as adults. As a group those traits are called neoteny. It's been speculated that since the advent of civilization humans have also been breeding themselves to be neotenous, removing territoriality and a lot of aggression from our species because those are dysfunctional when people live close together, and aggressive loners tend to get killed by annoyed neighbors before they can reproduce, or just fail at attracting mates now that it's illegal to kidnap, rape, or enslave people.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I like speculation. In a sense, the idea that we've been "breeding ourselves" is correct.

One very important thing about primates is that we are tribal critturs, which means that we can survive without communal aid but not nearly as well as we can among others of our kind. This need for community is so strong that we can attach ourselves across species to a certain extant-- and humans are show this behavior of enlarged tribal identity more than any other species. Other primates can attach themselves to us, for instance, better than they can to alternate ape species. It's a special talent we have


The fox breeding experiment wasn't very well documented, I think-- you can find references via google and you can find some adorable vids on youtube