How PC Must One Be to Read Romance?

Carolyn:


I am NOT a reviewer, as you can probably tell. Because, you see, I never stop to question why a story works for me, or why I stop reading before the first chapter is over. So I'm retiring before I get myself in trouble.

Look, I read for enjoyment, to lose myself in worlds that could never possibly exist in RL (real life). Mostly. I don't care if the author got an historical fact wrong. Not unless it's something egregious like putting the Crimean War in Africa or something. I do not get all worked up over descriptive terminology; I might blink a couple of times over some purple prose, but it just never occurred to me food was a no no to describe people. Any people.

It also never occurred to me I'd need a degree to read Romance. But so it seems sometimes. Deep, deep digging for character motivations, pointing out when actions don't match personality. Discussion of phobias, kinks, and all the psychological stuff (how's that for a medical word!) Well, I do have a lowly Associate degree in nursing, but somehow it leaves me feeling rather inept as an expert in Romance.

Ah well, live and learn.

Oh, I was languishing in an erotic wasteland before I saw the light and became a romance reader. I was a veritable virgin of sexual practices and alternative lifestyles. Lori got used to all my questions and once she stopped laughing her ass off, she graciously furthered my education. Some of it - I sort of wish she hadn't, lol. (Trying not to get too specific here).

But now! Ah now, I may not know all, but I'm no longer dumb as dirt. I've always believed 'to each their own' and that old standby 'it's not wrong if it's between two (or more, it seems) consenting adults and no one gets hurt'. I just never expected it all to be so ... let's call it imaginative.

So, I think I'm perfectly PC. I read the blogs with open mouth and wide eyes. And I don't buy what isn't in my comfort zone.

My ass is mine, hear???

But I'd much rather discuss with Lori and anyone else who cares to chime in, than write a 'formal' review. It makes my head hurt to even contemplate writing a formal review. I have nasty flashbacks to high school and English Lit.

So, no, nonono! Speak Lori! Compare and contrast! Let it all hang out. Tell me I'm an idiot (don't you dare!)


Lori:


Carolyn, my darling,

you may be an idiot but you're my idiot. Although not wanting to 'put it in the pooper' or 'felch' or any of those other lovely things might make you simply more sane than the rest of the ladies out there.

And even though we weren't discussing erotic fiction, may I just say that when I read a description of a blow job and he's shoved so deeply that his pubic hair is tickling her lips: I gag. She might swallow but I'm the one gagging.

However, reading is an experience that works on so many levels. You don't read a book and simply take in words: you lose yourself in the world described and when the writing is good then you can see, smell and taste what they see, smell and taste. Or gag when his pubic hair is tickling your lip. :gag:

What I dislike about so many authors out there is that they don't care about the story as much as they care only about making a sale. So if licking toe-jam from unicorns while dressed in a tutu is the next boundary, you know those brave writers are going to write it!

I call them hacks.

A hack writes for a market with no attempt to create art. A hack knows that erotica will sell so s/he writes erotica without heart or soul but lots of thrusting, uncomfortable bodies.

If someone's claim to fame is being published writing only what they think might sell, then they can have it. We don't want it.


Carolyn:


Well, you're right, I suppose. I made a little side trip into erotica. But you have to admit there's many a romance that has more than a tad of erotica in it.

Plus, I've noticed a push to include menages and kinks under the romance umbrella. I can't comment intelligently because it's not my life experience and I haven't read many of those types of books. Make that none.

Okay - there was the one you sent me with the three brothers who wanted one wife between them. Let me tell you she was fast running out of orifices and I was feeling the pain she evidently wasn't. And somehow the romance eluded me. It ended up a DNF.

Was it a romance? Or was it erotica? It impressed me so, I can't remember the author or title.

To be honest, it makes me a little uncomfortable to see some of these books reviewed as mainstream romance. But I try not to judge - who am I to judge? You'd be hard put to find anyone more vanilla or missionary than me, lol.

Frankly, at my age, I'm just thankful my mind is still relatively elastic. Even if my body isn't. OMG! I squatted down tonight to get something out of a low cabinet and I couldn't get back up! Had to get David to haul me to my feet.

The body's limited, but hopefully the mind never will be. *grin*

Do you remember my horror the first time I checked the Harlequin submission guidelines? They were so detailed. They didn't seem to leave any room for individuality. No Becomings. No Quatrains. Oh geeze, no dinosaurs!!!! You'd have to be an awfully good writer to produce a unique story when you're squeezed into a box like that.

It can be done, it has been done. But it'll never be done by me. I wouldn't even try, I know myself too well. I like the non-traditional ideas we come up with, separately and together.

And I have to have my dinosaurs, lol.


Lori:

I would like to know how many group marriages have been successful. We know any number of one to one relationships have.

If there's more than one person in the bed, then to me it will always be erotica.



Carolyn:

You know, this is what I was hoping for in the Writer's section of UG. Discussion - conversation & opinions - about authors, writing and - oh, just everything about the process and about what's out there.

I hope some of the folks who found us will join in. And if they don't, we'll just continue on because it's fun.

And we don't take ourselves too seriously. ;-)


Lori:

Can you imagine us being taken seriously?

Carolyn: It's 3,246.

Lori: No, it's 3,794.

Lea: What are you two arguing about?

Carolyn: How many chest hairs Carlos has.