|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
Some publishers are very specific about what they want while others may be more open to different concepts. But we all have elements that make that novel a romance. What elements do you use, and which do you let fall by the wayside.
HEA - the Happily Ever After. My romance stories and novels always end happily. Oh, not with a traditional white dress and wedding, but at least with the happy couple together.
Mostly from the FMC POV - this I have to let fall by the wayside in most of my romance stories. The reason is that I'm writing M/M (gay) erotic romance, so there isn't a female POV.
Length - I'm experimenting with this. I have a short story, a novella and novel out. I like the space that a novel gives me to develop the characters and the plot, but I'm getting used to working in a shorter novella length for some idea.
|
|
Joined: 3/15/2011
Posts: 10
|
I'm not one for abiding strictly to "rules" and I've gotten my share of "That's not romance" comments but for me romance is petty simple--Two lonely people finding/connecting with another lonely person who makes their life more complete and enjoyable. They may have that for a lifetime or a shorter time due to outside forces but for me it's still a romance for that couple at that point in time.
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
I think the smaller publishers and ebook publishers have broadened the definition of romance. Most still want that happy ending, but what that means exactly has changed from the white wedding dress to a more flexible version of together. I left my two heros playing together in the jungle. They assure me they're happy.
|
|
Joined: 3/14/2011
Posts: 8
|
HEA - Most of my stories end hapily, with 1 exception. That is one that has me scratching my head over how I would classify it. But I love happy endings, I love closing a book knowing that the characters are a unit.
I find myself writing from the guy's perspective the most. I don't know why. It really seems to depend on the story.
I have a few novellas and a few shorts and a couple novels. I think I'm still learning how to put it all together.
|
|
Joined: 3/14/2011
Posts: 10
|
For genre romance, a story has to have an HEA or HFN (happily ever after OR happily for now). As neciaphoenix says, the book needs to end with the couple together and things going well in their relationship.
I write a mix of hero & heroine POV, because when I read I like to glimpse what's going on in both of their heads and since I write 3rd person, I alternate POV scene to scene. Usually I end up with a ratio of 2:1 2 heroine scenes to every 1 hero scene.
I've experimented with different lengths. Published in short form, now I'm working on longer novels.
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
There was a time when the HEA for romance meant the novel started with a virgin and ended with a wedding. But as society changed and women moved into careers, romance novels began to shift to keep up with the audience. The FMC began to move up in age and have a career and then suddenly the FMC could be widowed or even "gasp" divorced and be on a second romance. Which meant she wasn't virginal.
The idea of the wedding ending held on for a long time, but when people began writing same sex couples, it wasn't feasible to end in a wedding since much of culture still rejects that. So the HEA expanded and became the HFA or Happily for now.
But we've dropped the need for the virgin bride. Though I admit I still get annoyed when there's a point in some more traditional romances where the FMC has to prove her cooking skills and that she's good with children.
|
|
Joined: 3/14/2011
Posts: 3
|
Nice thread topic. I only recently began writing romance and I am targeting Harlequin so I've been studying up on what defines a romance. What Taylor wrote is pretty much what I have found, too. For category there are specifics for each line that change the details like heat, suspense, paranormal, etc. But the essential structure is the same.
I'm writing an HEA in close third POV because that's what HQN wants. I'm also doing both a female POV and the male POV at about 60/40 split. It's the heroines story. Again, that is what HQN wants. So I guess I am writing to a market. Its one of the things that I like about writing romance, there are rules and the rules define the story scaffold.
Taylor nailed it, there are these nice guidelines and within them you can do about anything.
Leslie
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
Society defined- it is flawed, incomplete and/or corrupt. It oppresses the main character socially, physically or emotionally. It establishes the status quo. ex: Mrs. Bennett discussion of BIngley and Darcy's wealth.
Okay, I'm going to dust off the English Lit part of the MA here. Pride and Prejudice isn't a romance novel. It's actually considered a comedy of manners. A genre that really didn't survive into our time. It's been reinterpreted as a romance for/by modern readers because most people aren't aware of the finer details of 18th and 19th century manners. And in doing so, people seem to miss the other examples of marriage that aren't so HEA presented throughout the book. Jane Austen wasn't presenting her society as oppressing women as part of a romance trope. She did so because she lived in a society that oppressed women.
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
In Northanger Abbey, Austen actually pokes fun at the conceits of the romance novel of her day. She really was working to reveal the struggles women faced in a society where the only option was marriage.
But taking her work as an example in looking at what creates a romance also creates a problem. That first element of society defined as being corrupt and oppressing the FMC isn't really a necessary element in romance. You may still find it in historical or Regency romances since they may be set in a time where society did treat women as second class citizens (even outside the confines of the romance novel). But it isn't required overall in romance and outside of the historical categories could resort in a romance novel appearing dated.
Regis's book is an interesting look at romance novels in an historical concept but when you look at her list, she is still focused on the classic "virgin til marriage" plot for a romance. As a romance writer, she'd be about 20 to 30 years behind the genre.
|
|
Joined: 3/16/2011
Posts: 214
|
Marie wrote:
"That first element of society defined as being corrupt and oppressing the FMC isn't really a necessary element in romance."
Last night, I went over these eight elements to make sure that I had them all (I did! Yes!), and I interpret "society" as also encompassing relationship culture. Society still embraces the traditional marriage in which 2.5 children are born. Yet, 50 percent of these marriages end in divorce. There's your corruption right there. Just that. 
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
|
|
Joined: 3/11/2011
Posts: 156
|
Sorry, I'm still perplexed. If the corruption in society is that half of marriages end in divorce, then writing a romance following last centuries guidelines where the FMC's goal is pretty much to get married just seems, umm, odd. Why can't the FMC be a successful gal who can handle herself in society but still wouldn't mind finding that special guy?
Harlequin's "American Romance" line is still pretty much old fashioned and marriage oriented, but fortunately they have plenty of lines for female characters who've gotten past the oppression aspect. And even Carina Press where the FMC isn't always required.
|
|
Joined: 3/16/2011
Posts: 214
|
Marie,
I applaud any publisher who's willing to step out of the familiar constraints of what is considered an "acceptable" FMC (and I use this as an example only because this is what I write). I would love to see more out-of-the-box romance novels. I remember a time when you couldn't pick up a Harlequin romance that didn't have "baby" in the title or depict a pregnant FMC on the cover. D'you remember those days? OMG, horrific.
I come from a small town where the notion of a "successful gal" is one who gets married *AND* manages to opens a flower shop, LOL! I think that what we urban dwellers/lethally over-educated types often forget is that the larger readership doesn't necessarily reflect "us." Nor do they see the same obstacles to romance as does the writer.
My FMC is extremely successful in a male-dominated profession (politics). I could have written a plot in which she does find the right guy, but I still had to throw that timeworn expectation that women will one day get married, put their careers on hold (indefinitely) and have children, simply because I'm trying to think from the perspective of Most Readers, U.S.A. and their mental constructs. And quite frankly, I'm terrified that having such a strong FMC will alienate my demographic.
Gawd, am I making any sense here at all? Please tell me if I'm not.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
@Taylor / Marie / Lisa
I read through the 'list of 8', because understanding genre is one of my big challenges right now. I write what I write, and folks tell me I write it well, but I can't seem to find what genre it ought be in. Most of what I write has romantic elements, so romance is one of those I'm looking at.
#1 was the one that completely confused me, but Taylor's comment clarified it, *I think*. To confirm I'm getting it - I wrote a Military Romance where both MCs were active service. At the beginning of the story, they're assigned to the same HQ unit. One obstacle each of them sees is that the regulation against fraternization. Would that count as the 'societal oppression' factor?
On #8, is there a prejudice *against* an implied or stated wedding at this point? My romantic elements are around 50/50 regarding the subject, and it's only really an *issue* in one of them; the others marriage is stated or implied because the characters involved see it as the natural progression of a committed relationship.
Finally, do the elements have to be in that order? I understand transposing #8 and #2 is a little tough (oh, lord, now I'm going to HAVE to write that, or my brain will explode), but I've seen plenty of instances where the attraction comes before the barrier.
|
|
Joined: 5/3/2011
Posts: 7
|
I have problems staying within the guidelines of genres, most of the time all of them kind of mix together into one giant monster genre with no name. I really dislike HEA simply because I know that HEA although it can happen still comes with its flaws, I find myself almost adding a second act after the initial HEA to show that just because my main characters got together it doesn't mean their lives are going to be perfect. Plus I like the idea of a sequel without writing a separate book, then you get the best of both worlds, the HEA and the extended epilogue.
|
|
Joined: 5/10/2011
Posts: 2
|
Can we do away with marriage and still retain that spirit of romance? Can we just keep romance alive without the need of any institution that represents society, culture or anything else for that matter. Seldom does one capture romance in its pristine form. I am trying to keep the romance alive where the lover is no more and the love is!! Need some help on this aspect.
|
|
Joined: 5/10/2011
Posts: 3
|
I wouldn't listen too much to publishers. One thing I have noticed in the last few months with book fans is that they are getting frustrated at the similiar stories coming out of small publishing houses. Like the first post mentioned they are all identical really. So I wouldn't put much stock in what a publisher says. My published turned down a gothic erotic romance novella I did and said it would not sell, as no HEA, really powerful female lead (no alpha male) and several other X's in the boxes. I put that book out myself and it sold 5x what my four publishers books sold when added together. This is why I don't use publishers anymore. I was so close to deleting that book, but it has been my biggest hit. I think their is a market for the HEA, alpha male, uplifting story, but more people are looking for something a little darker, more exciting and unique.
|
|
|
|