Romantasy

[HyunnaPark]

Inspired by the "smut sales" thread, I've been looking at the Romantasy genre. I'm having trouble explaining what I'm seeing.

On paper, this should be a slam dunk. Lots of us love fantasy, and romance is a top selling genre so if you want to write professionally you want to at least consider it. Deep world building plus a strong emotional story sounds like a sweet spot for a lot of talented authors.

Yet I'm reading one of the top books in the genre and ... I'll just say that I have some notes. I saw one Youtuber talking about romantasy and they said something to the effect of "the problem is that the genre is supposed to be romance + fantasy, but it tends to not do either of those very well." So far, I agree.

My sense is that A Court of Thorns and Roses (which I have not yet read) was a Hunger Games-type smash hit and inspired a lot of authors to pile into the genre and kind of dilute it. This feels like a genre that's wide enough in scope that there's room for more than one story at the top.

 

[StillStunned]

On paper, this should be a slam dunk. Lots of us love fantasy, and romance is a top selling genre so if you want to write professionally you want to at least consider it. Deep world building plus a strong emotional story sounds like a sweet spot for a lot of talented authors.

The first time I encountered this genre, well before it was even defined as such, was probably "The Dragon Prince" series by Melanie Rawn, back in the late-1980s. I enjoyed the first trilogy, while recognising that there were "romance" elements that annoyed me. By the first book in the second series those elements were too much for me to ignore and I never finished the trilogy.

But like I noted in another thread, I read fantasy primarily for the adventure. If that's supported by strong and engaging characters, and they have interesting arcs, that's wonderful. But the romance characters tend to be flat and stereotypical, and a lot of the stories feel like watching The Bold and the Beautiful with a sprinkling of elves. When those books first cropped up in the Fantasy section of my local bookshop, I was disappointed and felt betrayed: this was *my* genre, but not anymore!

But good for anyone who can make money writing what they and/or their readers enjoy. Being aware of first the trend, and then the genre, has made it easier for me to accept that I'm not the intended audience.

 

[TheRedChamber]

As a fan of traditional fantasy and as a writer of smut, I've been wondering if the Sarah Maas books are worth reading? Thoughts, anyone?

PS @HyunnaPark - username change? When did that happen?

 

[HyunnaPark]

PS @HyunnaPark - username change? When did that happen?

This week. This username fits better with my dream of being the Queen of Literotica Romantasy (category size: 1)

 

[pink_silk_glove]

But the romance characters tend to be flat and stereotypical

Surprise! : P

 

[HyunnaPark]

But like I noted in another thread, I read fantasy primarily for the adventure. If that's supported by strong and engaging characters, and they have interesting arcs, that's wonderful. But the romance characters tend to be flat and stereotypical, and a lot of the stories feel like watching The Bold and the Beautiful with a sprinkling of elves. When those books first cropped up in the Fantasy section of my local bookshop, I was disappointed and felt betrayed: this was *my* genre, but not anymore!

I think that's something Romantasy readers are looking for. They generally seem to be there because of a genuine love for fantasy, and I sensed some irritation that they're not getting it (outside of the Sarah J Maas stuff, potentially). It didn't sound like readers were asking for much, just good, creative fantasy worldbuilding and a decent, tropey romance.

 

[TheLobster]

But the romance characters tend to be flat

I feel like that's unnecessarily harsh. I'm sure some of those characters are actually quite well-endowed.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I think that's something Romantasy readers are looking for. They generally seem to be there because of a genuine love for fantasy, and I sensed some irritation that they're not getting it (outside of the Sarah J Maas stuff, potentially). It didn't sound like readers were asking for much, just good, creative fantasy worldbuilding and a decent, tropey romance.

My impression is the opposite. I believe that romantasy authors are very much in touch with what the audience wants.
I'd also say that romantasy readers are primarily romance readers, and that the lack of proper fantasy elements in romantasy is deliberate as to not scare off the audience who isn't really into proper fantasy, which is most of them.
So I believe that the sprinkle of fantasy in romantasy is quite deliberate. If those readers wanted rich fantasy, they'd read Sanderson or Erikson or maybe Jemisin if they enjoy feminist fantasy.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

As a fan of traditional fantasy and I writer if smut, I've been wondering if the Sarah Maas books are worth reading? Thoughts, anyone?

PS @HyunnaPark - username change? When did that happen?

I didn't read any of the books, but I've read about them. I believe those books have a sprinkle of fantasy in the sense that the plot happens in the land of Fae, but the rest is romance and politics in that land. I might be wrong, so anyone who has actually read the books, feel free to correct me.

Proper fantasy isn't widely popular; it never was. LotR is the obvious exception due to its legendary status and Jackson's movies, and Harry Potter's success is mostly due to its focus on a young audience. Which boy doesn't dream of becoming a wizard?

 

[redgarters]

It seems a lot of romantasy these days is a variation of young underdog girl is chosen/becomes surprise leader/fights the odds/takes revenge while falling in love with the dangerous and terribly handsome but eventually flat and predictable adversary/superior/dark prince.
I enjoy underdog romantasy if they're well written - Sanderson's Mist Born and Skyward being very good examples. Some of the recent bestsellers are just too simple with this tropey enemies to lovers theme. Yarros' Fourth Wing starts off well but falls into all the pits and Francis' Silver Elite has a good idea for worldbuilding but fucks it up. Many of those feel like YA books but with smutty sex scenes thrown in.
In all honesty, some of the writers here on Lit could write better stories than some of the mainstream bestselling romantasy I've read in the last few years.
Still, I'm a sucker for the genre, so if you've got some good ones I'd love to hear about them.

 

[Jackie.Hikaru]

Still, I'm a sucker for the genre, so if you've got some good ones I'd love to hear about them.

Bloodsong of Wycaro by Carol Sturkas. By far the best romantasy out there.

 

[YmaOHyd]

Yet I'm reading one of the top books in the genre and ... I'll just say that I have some notes. I saw one Youtuber talking about romantasy and they said something to the effect of "the problem is that the genre is supposed to be romance + fantasy, but it tends to not do either of those very well." So far, I agree.

My sense is that A Court of Thorns and Roses (which I have not yet read) was a Hunger Games-type smash hit and inspired a lot of authors to pile into the genre and kind of dilute it. This feels like a genre that's wide enough in scope that there's room for more than one story at the top.

I have two specific thoughts about this -- three, actually.

The first is that the success of A Court of Thorns and Roses set a bad example for other authors because it's so close to Anne Bishop's Black Jewels stories. It basically told authors that they could steal pretty shamelessly from everyone else, originality not required. Everyone steals from everyone, that's normal, but I'm not sure it's normal at this scale. Edit: it's not just Black Jewels either; characters in Maas's novels speak lines from Treasure Planet (rattle the stars), Pride and Prejudice (yes, a thousand times, yes), Troy (the sun was shining when your wife left you), and Lord of the Rings (keep your forked tongue behind your teeth, you bow to no one among many many others).

Second, the target audience for romantasy right now, I think, is largely women who've aged out of young adult/new adult novels but don't want to. Both the audience for and protagonists of YA novels have been getting older for a little while, and I think it's something like a quarter of YA readers are 28 or older now. A lot of romantasy is written at what I'd consider a YA level; the formula is something like YA coming of age story + really implausible fuckin'. That's why so many of the protagonists are I think developed as My First Fanfiction characters; beautiful girls with every possible special quality and skill who capture the hearts of brooding men who also have every possible special quality, just not as much of it as the women. The romances happen because of tropey contrivances -- Childhood Friends to Lovers, Enemies to Lovers, Fated Mates (dear sweet mother of christ I hate fated mates), Past Life Lovers; it's pretty rare that a person meets a stranger and has experiences with them that lead to friendship, respect and, over time, love.

And third, I think romantasy as a genre label is basically a pejorative one. Novels are romantasies when the plots and worldbuilding aren't strong enough to support being called fantasy. Authors that do hit those heights in plotting and worldbuilding often reject the romantasy label -- Jacqueline Carey, for one, absolutely writes what might be considered romantasy, but when left to her own devices calls them historical fantasies. She wrote in her newsletter that (paraphrasing) romantasy is a label that implies shallowness, so while she allows her work to be described that way in marketing she doesn't like it. I think that's basically true, at least about the current boom.

 

[onehitwanda]

The Bold and the Beautiful with a sprinkling of elves

You owe me a new keyboard and a new cup of coffee.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

... In all honesty, some of the writers here on Lit could write better stories than some of the mainstream bestselling romantasy ...

I believe you mean "have written better stories." (Note: not me, but some of the good ones.)

--Annie

 

[alohadave]

Many of those feel like YA books but with smutty sex scenes thrown in.

Reading the first part of your post, this is exactly what popped into my head (not having read any personally).

 

[sister jenny]

I love romantasy!
And I read a lot of it.
And maybe it is not the most well written or whatever, but honestly, if I care about the characters and get invested in the story I can forgive a lot.

The reason I got into was that someone told me I had to read the Mistborn series and they annoyed me for several reasons. Really fucking cool worldbuilding, but he dragged his feet for 600000 pages and then rushed the last 70. Sanderson needs an editor.
But main reason was that it felt like it was written by a teen monk, it was so chaste it got annoying. And there could have been some good sex in those books.

Anyway, love the Empyrean books.
Court of thorns… was pretty ok, but kinda lost steam after a bit.
Really liked the Blood and Ash series, but same thing there, started dragging and losing steam.

 

[countdowntolov3]

My friends and I book club this shit. A court of Thorns and Roses, Fourth Wing, Outlander, etc.

Their easy-reading is a huge perk. I think it's the reason they're popular. Even my stressed-out-mom friends can find the time to listen to the audiobooks with only half their brain awake.

It's the same for the spice level, if you ask me. Just enough to be scandalous and fun to talk about -- but not too graphic to make it weird. I think the successful authors are very intentional riding that line.

P.S. I'm kind of tired of my male friends making fun of romantasy like it's some ditsy girly thing to read guilty pleasure books. Meanwhile they're binging Lit RPG stuff. I tried to read Dungeon Crawler Carl with them -- holy hell dudes, how can you be throwing stones from that glass house?!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

My friends and I book club this shit. A court of Thorns and Roses, Fourth Wing, Outlander, etc.

Their easy-reading is a huge perk. I think it's the reason they're popular. Even my stressed-out-mom friends can find the time to listen to the audiobooks with only half their brain awake.

It's the same for the spice level, if you ask me. Just enough to be scandalous and fun to talk about -- but not too graphic to make it weird. I think the successful authors are very intentional riding that line.

P.S. I'm kind of tired of my male friends making fun of romantasy like it's some ditsy girly thing to read guilty pleasure books. Meanwhile they're binging Lit RPG stuff. I tried to read Dungeon Crawler Carl with them -- holly hell dudes, how can you be throwing stones from that glass house?!

I've read or tried reading plenty of LitRPGs. There are a few I truly enjoyed.

I've also found that the most popular ones suck the most. I suspect that the same might be true for romantasy.

But either way, neither of those should sit in fantasy next to serious fantasy books. They are a popular, light read and should be treated (and categorized) as such.

 

[redgarters]

I believe you mean "have written better stories." (Note: not me, but some of the good ones.)

--Annie

Oh, absolutely what I meant!

Reading the first part of your post, this is exactly what popped into my head (not having read any personally).

Reading Fourth Wing, I was plodding along the familiar but interesting storyline (yay dragons and weak underdog girl setting out to conquer world), and then turning a page I was suddenly thrown into a few pages of hard cock and a throbbing clit and some serious fucking. A bit like watching The Hobbit with some sudden hardcore penetration porn for five minutes. For a minute there I thought like "uh, is this allowed?".
I bet all the grandmas buying those lovely books about dragons for teen granddaughter presents don't quite know that they're helping build the next generation of Lit readers.

 

[Britva415]

Jacqueline Carey, for one, absolutely writes what might be considered romantasy, but when left to her own devices calls them historical fantasies. She wrote in her newsletter that (paraphrasing) romantasy is a label that implies shallowness

Would she allow the implication of romance? It kind of sounds like that's what she's trying to dodge. idk how much romance makes up her historical fantasy stories.

 

[YmaOHyd]

Would she allow the implication of romance? It kind of sounds like that's what she's trying to dodge. idk how much romance makes up her historical fantasy stories.

I mean, I think romantic fantasy describes most of her work reasonably well. Historical fantasy is a convenient shorthand to describe stories that are set in an alternate-magical version of our own world. As for how much romance makes up those stories....? Maybe they're three parts romance, seven parts political intrigue, but it varies. I think she's right specifically about the label 'romantasy' for reasons I laid out in that post, though. It's something you see occasionally on the fantasy romance subreddit; people try to read Kushiel's Dart because they've heard it's an amazing kinky romantasy and bounce off when they're required to read it closely and seriously to understand the plot and relationships.

 

[Nynah]

Reading Fourth Wing, I was plodding along the familiar but interesting storyline (yay dragons and weak underdog girl setting out to conquer world), and then turning a page I was suddenly thrown into a few pages of hard cock and a throbbing clit and some serious fucking. A bit like watching The Hobbit with some sudden hardcore penetration porn for five minutes. For a minute there I thought like "uh, is this allowed?".

The only thing that kept me going with Fourth Wing was the dragons. Whenever there was sex, I just skipped over it because it was honestly forgettable.

But either way, neither of those should sit in fantasy next to serious fantasy books. They are a popular, light read and should be treated (and categorized) as such.

Publishing and bookstores are two of the most backwards, slow-to-change, stuck-in-the-mud industries so while I agree that separating the two would make the most sense, I don't know that I'd hold my breath for it.

 

[redgarters]

The only thing that kept me going with Fourth Wing was the dragons. Whenever there was sex, I just skipped over it because it was honestly forgettable.

Yup. Totally only sticking with that series for the dragons.

 

[RocketGrunt]

Romantasy is also a flourishing genre in Japan and Korea, with series like Pass the Monster Meat Milady! and My Next Life as a Villainess: All Routes Lead to Doom! getting popular enough to have their own animes made, and the Romantasy subgenre of "Possession Stories" being so massive that there are stories like I Thought It Was a Common Possession where the romantasy heroine is self aware of being in a Romantasy and is familiar with tropes of the Possession Stories subgenre.

Very much recommend: The Villainess Lives Twice. It's a Korean novel that was made into a 230 episode Manwha.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Would she allow the implication of romance? It kind of sounds like that's what she's trying to dodge. idk how much romance makes up her historical fantasy stories.

At least in the first three Kushiel books, romance is a major presence in Carey's work. Phèdre, the protagonist of the first series, is a kind of Chosen One/sacred courtesan/spy who falls in love with her straight-laced bodyguard Joscelyn but also has an ongoing rivals/lovers thing with Melisande, one of the antagonists.

Those entanglements are important parts of the story but there's also a lot else going on - political intrigue, religion etc. Overall I think it would be better described as a fantasy series with major romance arcs, rather than a romance per se.

Marketing it as "romance" would risk some disgruntled customers. By the standards of 2001 when the series launched, the romance aspect is quite unconventional: it has strong kink elements (years before 50SoG brought that into the mainstream), Phèdre is unrepentantly non-monogamous and continues to have sex with other people even after she and Jos commit to one another, and she's bisexual (not just in an "open to threesomes" kind of way).

Romance is a bit more open to those kinds of elements now than it was then, but it's still the kind of thing that might be an unwelcome surprise to readers who were looking for a more mainstream romance.