I understand the context, but I still find it interesting that Harlequin would use the phrase "just romance". In any context. Ever. I mean that is the heart and core of their brand, not "just" anything.
I don't think you have to be a big E L James fan to realize that any
call to burn books is regressive, puritanical, and frankly patronizing
to the reading public. And it doesn't matter who is doing it or why.
You
don't fight abuse by suggesting females are too weak minded to separate
fantasy from reality, and will run out and beg to be abused just
because they read a smexy book.
Or is the suggestion
that reading a novel about a dubious relationship is some kind of
"thought crime"? Thus rendering this charity less progressive that Queen
Elizabeth the first who famously said: "I have no desire to make windows into mens souls."
I was pretty much stopped cold by a line in an interview with authors SL Armstrong and K Piet. I will start by saying I have read and greatly enjoyed these authors' book and I have no issue whatsoever with fiction about consensual incest or the points they are making in this post as read in its entirety. In fact I fully agree.
That said, I was temporarily shocked to scan down and see a bolded bullet point saying: "Love and Consent Should Trump Abuse"
I absolutely agree that "The addition of consent shouldn’t somehow make the content more objectionable" when speaking of relationships depicted in fiction. And, actually, that fiction is fiction and you should be able to write about any damn thing you want up to and including stuff that would be wildly horrible if it happened in real life.
However in the real world abuse can and does occur with victims that love their abuser and consent to the abuse, including but not limited to children, animals, the developmental delayed, and those who are under the abuser's total control despite possibly being (objectively speaking) free to leave at any time.
What happens in fiction is fiction and I have the somewhat unpopular view that absolutely everything should be allowed. But abuse is the kind of subject where it is important to be very clear when you are talking about fiction and when you are talking about the real world. Even if that means prefacing every single statement with an awkward caveat.
Just my 2c.
RWA has recently been clarifying its position that general members must be "seriously pursuing a romance fiction writing career".
My first thought is that this puts the 'romance is between one man and one women' debate of yore in a new light. As, had the initiative succeeded, M/M writers would presumably have been expelled from the general (voting) membership.
However in this case the people having their asses handed to them are the writers off books 'with romantic elements'. Including people who have been up until now been general members, not to mention RITA nominees, PAN members etc. (Oh, and RWA has a 'with romantic elements' special interest chapter.)
This "clarification" looks a hell of lot like a change of position because the implication seems to be that, contrary to what was said at the last convention, 'WRE' members will be ousted from the general member category into the non-voting, unwashed category.
Well, it was about time for the semi-annual RWA cock-up, wasn't it?
Do you remember when Ravenous Romance hit the internetz with a hiss and a roar back in 2008? I sure do. My comment was: "Time, and sales volume, will tell."
It would be nice to have some sales numbers for them :). Novella length anthologies count in these numbers too, in case you were wondering.
Captive Unicorn is a new erotic and erotic romance e-publisher. Royalty-only, typically paying 37% of cover price. Light on details re: owners and staff.
Read more...Can penning a novel narrow your job prospects? Well, there does seem to be one job you wil have more trouble getting: ambassador to the Vatican. Proposed Bulgarian ambassador, Kiril Marichkov, got knocked back-- reportedly due to the content of his out-of-print novel Clandestination.
The book has been characterized as 'racy' and 'gay' because an impoverished character turns to prostitution. Apparently it is deeply offensive for a married, straight author to write about a gay act carried out by a straight man as an act of desperation even though the character regrets his behavior and prays for forgiveness afterwards.
The next time I want to read a racy gay book, I suspect I will be looking elsewhere.
Jill Noble (late of Noble Romance) will apparently now be an epublishing-only agent with the Lori Perkins Agency.
A hat-trick of hinky?
Or more, depending on how you count it.
Sinlist [ (s
nˌlɪst]
Quote via TM Publishing:
"Many readers today struggle to find something worth reading.
Unfortunately, many books—even best sellers—are littered with graphic
descriptions of sex and violence. In a busy world, a reader might spend a
good portion of their reading time just looking for a good book to
read!
...
More importantly, in every genre, TM Publishing books and magazines
never include graphic descriptions of sex or violence. Great literature
can be clean literature, too"
Late in 2010, Ellora's Cave morphed Cerridwen Press into their Blush imprint. So I was rather confused to see recent references to a Cerridwen Publishing. Well, actually Cerridwyn. But it still seems odd to brand a new romance press with a name that has been used by a previous romance press. I don't think one letter is enough to avoid confusion.
Edited to add banners:
© Blogger template The Professional Template II by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009
Back to TOP
