In defence of romance
Jun. 2nd, 2013 04:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lokifanFYI: as ever am open for discussion and disagreement; I will still like you! But I will probably explain why I disagree, so.
teprometo linked to jelazakazone’s interesting bit of meta and discussion on the subject of how we define gen fic and romance. It’s interesting reading the comments, not least because I seem to be a lot more conservative in defining something as genfic than some people. Plot-focussed romance I still consider romance; if the romance (including an emotional arc between an established couple) is important enough to have an important climax I tend to think of the fic as “plotty slash/femmeslash/whatever” than “genfic with romance subplot”.
But that’s not the main thing that struck me about the comments on the post.
The main thing that struck me was people hating on “romance” as a term, as a concept, as a genre.
:( :( :( :(
It’s not even a lot of people. It’s just another, pretty minor example of this... thing in fandom. This thing which really bothers me and makes me sad. The commenters who said the things I quote below haven’t brought on this surge of OMG NO (or I’d be replying to those comments directly as opposed to replying to one and then writing more wide-ranging ranty meta). But it’s an example.
“when somebody says "romance" I think of Mills and Boon and all those other crappy sappy books that I would never touch”
“I find myself repelled by the word "romance." It brings to mind flowers and marriage proposals and declarations of love, and all that stuff grosses me out and squicks me. I don't like marriage fic. I don't like kid fic... "Romance" comes off cheap to me. It comes off easy and frivolous.”
I just. This is difficult to discuss, because there are different axes in the conversation and classification; there’s personal taste (for love stories or not, for different varieties of love stories) and questions of classification and genre. But there’s also just the way the traditionally feminine gets slammed and dismissed and reviled, by both men and women. Girly stuff is gross and repulsive and silly and shallow and easy and frivolous. So this bunch of thoughtful, broadly feminist women can love shipper fic but hate romance.
:(((((((((((((((((
This seriously, to me, plays into the way women for whom strength and feminism and not being one of those stupid girly girls - maybe not being a mainstream girl but some variety of geek - is a part of their self image will SLAM traditionally feminine stuff and dismiss it. And it makes me so sad. I don’t read many romance books myself but I’ve had some favourites. And while romance definitely has its issues, it takes a completely disproportionate level of hate and dismissal, in very revealing terms. I saw just as much dismissal of Twilight with talk of its ‘squealing’ (young, female) ‘stupid’ fans who are too blinded by oestrogen to know RPattz isn’t a vampire as I did thoughtful feminist criticism.
Don’t get me wrong; shipperfic isn’t the same as a romance novel, and not just because the characters are already known and loved. There are different conventions, there’s more room for bittersweet or unhappy endings or darkness or kink (although I find people often have a very limited idea of romance if they don’t read it themselves: romance novels are not as unvaried as non-fans suppose). There are good reasons to like shipperfic and not enjoy romance novels.
But I really am tired of the way romance gets slammed. Of seeing flisters I love, who really enjoy happy endings and novel-lengths and deep character studies and the other things I love about romance novels, say “I don’t like romance, it always makes me hate the heroine.” Like. It’s become part of the mark of how unusual we are, us fandomers (and slashers) who don’t buy into the mainstream and don’t believe the hype and don’t like all the usual girl stuff. Romance is very often heteronormative and a lot of us are queer, it’s very white and middle-class and there are obvious reasons to be pushed away. But seriously, hating on romance as stupid girl books for stupid girls is not unusual or feminist or weird or anti-corporate. It’s bog-standard and boring and everywhere.
Romance is varied. Romance does unusual things. Romance heroines are not all stupid, and they’re not all ideals of patriarchal femininity, and they’re not all perfect. Romance heroes are not all ‘alphas’, and they’re not all dominant, and they’re not all perfect. Romance is a genre overwhelmingly written by and for women (NOT UNLIKE THAT OTHER KIND OF LITERATURE WE LIKE) and while plenty of it is conservative (it’s over 60% of all books sold, some of it will be annoying) romance does not break the general trend: female-dominated genres? Generally kind of subversive.
Seriously. There is Mills&Boon from before WW1 with explicitly suffragist heroines, there’s Mills&Boon from the 50s with working women and working mothers, even the epitome of the despised romance is not automatically or inherently sexist or silly.
And I get why, when romance is strongly associated with women, it can feel alienating because this image of romance and love and womanhood doesn’t connect. And certainly romance has its real problems (why so many rich white people? Also the evil bisexual ex trope is not entirely dead yet, FFS) but seriously. The way romance gets slammed using all these words associated with women and femininity and girliness (shallow, frivolous, easy, stupid, cheap, sappy) and dismissed as stupid and bad with such virulence - come on, guys. I expect this from the male-dominated literary establishment, I expect it from idiotic fanboys, I expect it from critics. I really don’t like expecting it from fandom.
My last, favoured quote from the comments of that post:
“I used to have a negative gut reaction to the word romance -- I associated it with the hearts and flowers and gushing declarations kinds of stories. However, I don't anymore. Primarily I write romance and that's what I like to read. For me, the word romance is more akin to 'love story' -- a story mainly about how two people fall in love and go on a journey where they end up together ... eventually.” -planejane
teprometo linked to jelazakazone’s interesting bit of meta and discussion on the subject of how we define gen fic and romance. It’s interesting reading the comments, not least because I seem to be a lot more conservative in defining something as genfic than some people. Plot-focussed romance I still consider romance; if the romance (including an emotional arc between an established couple) is important enough to have an important climax I tend to think of the fic as “plotty slash/femmeslash/whatever” than “genfic with romance subplot”.But that’s not the main thing that struck me about the comments on the post.
The main thing that struck me was people hating on “romance” as a term, as a concept, as a genre.
:( :( :( :(
It’s not even a lot of people. It’s just another, pretty minor example of this... thing in fandom. This thing which really bothers me and makes me sad. The commenters who said the things I quote below haven’t brought on this surge of OMG NO (or I’d be replying to those comments directly as opposed to replying to one and then writing more wide-ranging ranty meta). But it’s an example.
“when somebody says "romance" I think of Mills and Boon and all those other crappy sappy books that I would never touch”
“I find myself repelled by the word "romance." It brings to mind flowers and marriage proposals and declarations of love, and all that stuff grosses me out and squicks me. I don't like marriage fic. I don't like kid fic... "Romance" comes off cheap to me. It comes off easy and frivolous.”
I just. This is difficult to discuss, because there are different axes in the conversation and classification; there’s personal taste (for love stories or not, for different varieties of love stories) and questions of classification and genre. But there’s also just the way the traditionally feminine gets slammed and dismissed and reviled, by both men and women. Girly stuff is gross and repulsive and silly and shallow and easy and frivolous. So this bunch of thoughtful, broadly feminist women can love shipper fic but hate romance.
:(((((((((((((((((
This seriously, to me, plays into the way women for whom strength and feminism and not being one of those stupid girly girls - maybe not being a mainstream girl but some variety of geek - is a part of their self image will SLAM traditionally feminine stuff and dismiss it. And it makes me so sad. I don’t read many romance books myself but I’ve had some favourites. And while romance definitely has its issues, it takes a completely disproportionate level of hate and dismissal, in very revealing terms. I saw just as much dismissal of Twilight with talk of its ‘squealing’ (young, female) ‘stupid’ fans who are too blinded by oestrogen to know RPattz isn’t a vampire as I did thoughtful feminist criticism.
Don’t get me wrong; shipperfic isn’t the same as a romance novel, and not just because the characters are already known and loved. There are different conventions, there’s more room for bittersweet or unhappy endings or darkness or kink (although I find people often have a very limited idea of romance if they don’t read it themselves: romance novels are not as unvaried as non-fans suppose). There are good reasons to like shipperfic and not enjoy romance novels.
But I really am tired of the way romance gets slammed. Of seeing flisters I love, who really enjoy happy endings and novel-lengths and deep character studies and the other things I love about romance novels, say “I don’t like romance, it always makes me hate the heroine.” Like. It’s become part of the mark of how unusual we are, us fandomers (and slashers) who don’t buy into the mainstream and don’t believe the hype and don’t like all the usual girl stuff. Romance is very often heteronormative and a lot of us are queer, it’s very white and middle-class and there are obvious reasons to be pushed away. But seriously, hating on romance as stupid girl books for stupid girls is not unusual or feminist or weird or anti-corporate. It’s bog-standard and boring and everywhere.
Romance is varied. Romance does unusual things. Romance heroines are not all stupid, and they’re not all ideals of patriarchal femininity, and they’re not all perfect. Romance heroes are not all ‘alphas’, and they’re not all dominant, and they’re not all perfect. Romance is a genre overwhelmingly written by and for women (NOT UNLIKE THAT OTHER KIND OF LITERATURE WE LIKE) and while plenty of it is conservative (it’s over 60% of all books sold, some of it will be annoying) romance does not break the general trend: female-dominated genres? Generally kind of subversive.
Seriously. There is Mills&Boon from before WW1 with explicitly suffragist heroines, there’s Mills&Boon from the 50s with working women and working mothers, even the epitome of the despised romance is not automatically or inherently sexist or silly.
And I get why, when romance is strongly associated with women, it can feel alienating because this image of romance and love and womanhood doesn’t connect. And certainly romance has its real problems (why so many rich white people? Also the evil bisexual ex trope is not entirely dead yet, FFS) but seriously. The way romance gets slammed using all these words associated with women and femininity and girliness (shallow, frivolous, easy, stupid, cheap, sappy) and dismissed as stupid and bad with such virulence - come on, guys. I expect this from the male-dominated literary establishment, I expect it from idiotic fanboys, I expect it from critics. I really don’t like expecting it from fandom.
My last, favoured quote from the comments of that post:
“I used to have a negative gut reaction to the word romance -- I associated it with the hearts and flowers and gushing declarations kinds of stories. However, I don't anymore. Primarily I write romance and that's what I like to read. For me, the word romance is more akin to 'love story' -- a story mainly about how two people fall in love and go on a journey where they end up together ... eventually.” -
planejane