Archives
Categories:
- Business announcements
- Best First Line Contest
- Books/Reading
- Contests
- Editing
- New Releases/Excerpts
- Life
- Miscellaneous
- Round Robin
- TV/Movies
- Writing
Recent Comments
- Crystal Dee (Tales of a Sequel Whore )
- Leah Braemel (Tales of a Sequel Whore )
- Devon Ellington (Do you NaNo?)
- Beth Williamson (Devils on Horseback Rides in Again!)
- Jess Dee (The things we shouldn’t love…but we do…)
- Rhian Cahill (Devils on Horseback Rides in Again!)
- Chris Redding (The story behind the story.)
- Karin (Dedications)
- Beth Williamson (Dedications)
- Crystal Dee (Dedications)
Are You a Romance Purist?
What do I mean by “purist?”
Obviously the story between the hero and heroine is the most important part of a romance. But if a book has a little something more, say an unresolved plot thread, or an interesting secondary character, as a reader does it annoy you? Or make you scream “this is purely a set-up for the next book” or do you find it…refreshing?
One of the first writers workshops I attended, the presenter, an award winning romance author, passed out a sheet of paper with different scenes. We were supposed to rank the scenes in order of importance to the story. So I whipped off my answers and was more than eager to share them with the class, because I thought I’d nailed it. Wrong. I ended up getting hammered by the teacher. The scenes I loved, rich with characterization and setting, snappy dialogue, were considered useless scenes to the whole of the story; the romance. The secondary characters shouldn’t have a voice. And I was scolded that one should only have two POV in a romance – the hero and the heroine. One or the other should be in every scene. Period. Everything has to be tidied up. Period.
Being a bit of a rebel, I bristled at that advice. Is it because I write a series where each book is a standalone but is connected to the to the other – past and upcoming – books in the series? Is there a downside to seeing the series as a whole, and not just a single book?
Some of the best romances involve a secondary character, or third or fourth plot lines, with characters whose POV can strengthen motivations. It is hard to do, but done well (like the In Death books by JD Robb) it can be a masterclass in how to create layers which add to the whole of the book, rather than detract from it.
What say you? Do you prefer a strictly hero/heroine story?
Lorelei James
Cowgirl Up and Ride – coming March 18th, 2008
www.loreleijames.com
I used to think romances had to be only two POV as well, simply because I’d never read one that had an additional POV. Then one day I did and I thought, ‘wow. you can do that?’. It annoys me that a writing teacher would say you can’t have this or that in a romantic novel. Who’s to say? Romance has evolved so much over the decades. At one point as I recall they were all only one POV. Then they started adding the hero’s POV and now it’s strange to see a novel written entirely from the heroine’s POV. Once upon a time someone probably would have said you couldn’t have a couple make love before marriage, or you couldn’t have a man who had less money than the heroine. I’m pretty sure someone would have said a big no-no to having a vampire as a romantic lead.
The boundaries are shifting all the time and that can only be good for the growth of the genre in the long run.
No, I’m not a purist. I enjoy stories with memorable secondary characters. The downside is that being an author myself, I’m always asked by fans when “so-in-so’s” book is coming out.
It seems almost the “norm” nowadays to write series, and readers almost expect it. If you write a compelling secondary character, you might have some fan grumblings if you have no inclinations to write a story for them.
I think adding in more POV’s broadens the plot and makes things bigger and/or more complicated. But the focus must always stay on the H/h in the story, even if there is many POV’s.
I do have to say, however, that epic tomes (such as fantasy series) have waaaay to many side characters at times. Romance authors should write wisely and not introduce “too many” secondaries, or the story begins to evolve into something other than a romance.
Usually, I like to do the H/h POV, perhaps a few POV shifts to the best friend(s) or family members, and perhaps getting a glimpse into the villain’s side of things. Other than that, I’d leave it out.
~~Becka
http://www.RebeccaGoings.com
I am so NOT a purist. In fact, I think I’m the anti-purist. I abhor the terms “hero” and “heroine” — opting to call my primary characters “protagonists” (partly because it sounds less like a fairy tale and partly because it is better suited for same-sex fiction, which I often write).
I find secondary characters add life to a book, providing a canvas upon which to better paint my protagonists as they interact. The more colorful the secondary characters, the greater the opportunity to develop my primaries each time they’re in a scene/chapter together.
As for POV, the story dictates.
Sami – You’re exactly right, I remember the very first romance I read was called “Who Rides The Tiger” and the only POV was the heroine, looking back now was TSTL, the hero was mean, and a silly misunderstanding kept them apart and then HEA. We’ve evolved.
Rebecca, that’s happened to me too, where a fan says “when is so and so’s book coming out?” and I’d never planned for that character to have a book. And I think it’s easy to get sucked into that mindset that every secondary character has to have a book of his or her own, and you write differently, with that in mind.
Alessia – thanks for pointing that out, I should’ve said protags, not just H/H (although that would work for male/male, eh?) because I do love writing and reading male/male stories too.
Lorelei
That’s the sort of thing that makes me gnash my teeth. The rules of good writing and storytelling are the same, no matter what you’re writing. Romance does NOT have to be dumbed down and simplified and spoonfed to readers because they can’t keep all that information in their little heads. ARGH! Yes, if you’re writing a mystery the book should be about the mystery and not twenty chapters on how to grow carnations in France, and the same goes for romance, and any other genre, but that doesn’t mean the book can’t be rich, layered and detailed.
The short answer is that I’m not a purist by any means.
A layered book is a great book IMO. I want the secondary characters to be rich and drawn out. I want to see other POV’s.
One of the things that I constantly gnash my teeth at is the rule that the hero and heroine must meet within so many pages. Well, sometimes the plot doesn’t support the meeting by page 3 or whatever it is.
The story and the characters are “the thing.” Not everyone else’s rules.
Charli, I thought that might get your back up :) I think that some of the “how to” seminars you can attend through various professional writer’s organizations sometimes are misleading to beginning writers, and heck, even to established authors. And it’s interesting that the books which seem to garner the most buzz or interest in the romance world of late, follow their own “rules.”
Mechele – boy, howdy, do I hear you there. In romance, it’s the first meeting within the first 3 pages; in mystery it’s a body found within the first 10 pages. I hope I’m creating layered plots and characters, and not just in the name of having a spin-off book. God forbid that I write the same damn book over and over. Yes, I think you have to take readers expectations into account, but if something doesn’t fit, like having to throw in a menage, then it doesn’t fit and the author should stay true to their own rules, of which mine is, write an entertaining book.
I love stories where the secondary characters have a voice and more important a personality. For me it makes the story more real. I mean in real life the secondary characters in your life, not only have a voice, but quirky character traits. Why shouldn’t the characters in your story be the same way?