This post is more of a lament on my part, having come across comments in the blogosphere a few months ago wherein some other folks lamented about the lack of hard SF elements in science fiction romance novels, mainly those released by romance publishers.
Consider also an issue that dovetails with the one above: There are concerns that some stories—released by SF publishers more often than not—leave readers cold when it comes to the romance. Either there isn’t enough of it, or the execution fell short of expectations, or both.
Both good romance and good science fiction involve a significant amount of craft, and there are plenty of great books in both genres to demonstrate the abundance of talent that abounds. Yet, another related observation I’ve seen put forth is that authors who do both well are few and far between. Is that really the case, or are there other considerations?
All of the above brings me to this point: Might it be beneficial to examine the writing and publishing of science fiction romance as a scope of competence issue? Scope of competence “…defines or limits what the individual within the profession may do and is determined by one’s education, training and experience.”
In other words, to what extent should readers expect an author to be well versed in both SF and romance? (To clarify: I'm not talking about authors getting degrees in astrophysics, psychology, and sex therapy!) Do the books on the market reflect such knowledge—or a possible lack of it?
Authors aren’t the only ones on the hot seat. Are editors equally versed in SF and romance regardless of publisher? Is the ideal an editor who’s had experience editing both SF and romance books? In light of our discussion about the early futuristic romances, are editors on both sides of the genre fence more competent now than they were 20 - 30 years ago?
I realize that scope of competence will never be a formal variable in publishing the way it is in the fields of mental health, law, or medicine, but how would you feel if more authors and editors expanded their science fiction romance skills by adapting the model of continuing education? For example, this might involve becoming more widely read in SF and romance novels, taking advanced workshops, or having manuscripts vetted by the relevant experts.
None of this could be realistically tracked, of course, and some authors and editors have already committed to these types of efforts. But given the concerns that have historically plagued SFR, I can’t help but brainstorm a few possibilities that could potentially address them.
And another thing—should authors write solely to the readership based on the publisher releasing their books? In some cases, it’s probably a balancing act between art and commerce (and career survival). I can understand why, say, inspirational romances won’t venture into experimental territory. I can understand why most hard SF novels won’t have the real estate available for a romance arc.
But why shouldn’t science fiction romance have a little more wiggle room, regardless of publisher?
The issue makes me wonder if publishers are bound by too much by branding when it comes to SFR. Stories from SF publishers could easily embrace more romance, and stories from romance publishers could embrace more science fictional elements. Or is the branding so hardwired that it will override variations in the stories across publishers by selecting out the ones that don’t fit the brand?
For example: Will we ever see a science fiction romance with hard SF elements from Harlequin? I imagine that if a Harlequin author wanted to pen a tale akin to Catherine Asaro’s SUNRISE ALLEY, his/her agent might have to shop the book elsewhere, either because of the perception/fact that Harlequin readers would frantically apply the brakes when it came to such a story, or the publisher itself is reluctant to allow their editors & authors to increase their scopes of competence.
Anyone can publish science fiction romance, of course, but the reality surrounding and constraining creative issues still bites the big one.
Joyfully yours,
Heather
15 comments:
Actually, I think your Harlequin scenario happened with Diane Palmer's The Morcai Battalion. Apparently they didn't have a problem with it, since they published it under their Luna imprint in 2007. ( http://www.eharlequin.com/storeitem.html?iid=16125&cid=309 )
I'm still thinking over the rest of your post. You do make some good points. {Smile}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
Anne, hello and thanks so much for the heads up about Ms. Palmer's book.
This is yet another example of why word of mouth is crucial for these books. I never would have thought to search for an SFR under the LUNA imprint. (A visit to the author's Web site reveals that it was published as an SF book while at Manor Books. Interesting!)
Obviously, since I didn't know about it I haven't read it, but hopefully I can check it out soon.
I wonder if Harlequin has other hidden SFR treasures?
Heather... As soon as the cloning technology is mainstream, I swear, I'm starting a petition to have you cloned. We *need* more Heathers.
I wonder if this isn't another sexist thing, that a genre that's primarily intended for women can't possibly be both at once: good SF and good romance. You know what I mean? A romance author can't be expected to know anything about *true* or *hard* SF and that her readers, gentle beings that they are, wouldn't know the difference anyway...
Sarcasm aside, I'll keep saying it until I'm blue in the face: love and rivets are not mutually excluding.
Bad writing is bad writing. It exists in all genres, sub-genres, non-genres, has always existed and will as long as humans string words together. In some genres like romance, the less-than-stellar examples seem to pollute everything else, even only by association.
I'm guilty of that. I grew up on SF and fantasy, tried a couple of times to read "that romance stuff" and happened on a couple of bad books. Of course, in my tiny head, it meant romance wasn't for me, that it sucked, etc, etc. As if the handful of stories I read had somehow become a representation of the genre, instead of just a bunch of books I didn't like. It took another 15-16 years for me to read another book labeled as romance. And guess what? It had conflict, it had a smart and strong heroine, an equally smart and strong hero, plenty of interesting villains. Suddenly, I was kicking myself for allowing a handful of bad apples to sour the whole genre for me.
Hey, I never said I was smart.
Thanks for the welcome, Heather, {SMILE}
I don't know what else might be hiding in Harlequin. I wasn't trying to do a comprehensive search when stumbled across The Morcai Battalion. I was just going thru Luna's backlist looking for potential Christmas gifts.
I don't even know why that one caught my eye. I just remember that when I read the sample chapter, I noticed an alien planet, exobiologists, hover-cars (for all intents), but neither an elf or magic spell around. {Chuckle, BIG GRIN, wink}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
"I wonder if this isn't another sexist thing, that a genre that's primarily intended for women can't possibly be both at once: good SF and good romance."
That and I think marketing reinforces it. The Romance genre waaaay outsells SF and it's assumed girls must have a lot of the mushy stuffy anyway.
The trouble I have is both SF and Romance have constraining conventions. Additionally, Science Fiction Romance falls victum to Trend Hell more often because of it being crammed under the Paranormal Romance umbrella. (((sigh))) Meanwhile, regular Science Fiction is just too hostile to anything which doesn't toe its line, and yet they can't figure out why their numbers are declining. (((rolls eyes)))
I thought that Luna had folded? Is that true? I got one or two of their books from the library but I didn't buy any. Most were more Fantasy than my taste, or at least marketed that way. But my big gripe with them was most of the their books were large format paperbacks. I only buy mass market paperbacks, if a book comes out in large format or hardback I get it from the library or pass. the trade paperbacks are too expensive, take up too much shelf space, and are a pain to carry around tossed in a purse.
I pitched an SFR to Harlequin at a conference. The bottom line is that they don't close the door on that genre (especially in the Luna line) if the story is good, etc.
HQN does have Susan Grant, which is more "futuristic", but the foot could be considered in the door there.
I just read Eve Kenin's HIDDEN. Dorchester's SHOMI line is very much dipper into the SFR waters, though admittedly not "in space" kind of SFR. More "Mad Max" SFR, a la Marianne de Pierres' NYLON ANGEL books. But worthy, definitely worthy.
I was impressed by the depth of medical knowledge in Kenin's HIDDEN until I read in her bio that she's not only a chiropractor but has a degree in microbiology and teaches human anatomy. Yowza. Her knowledge is awesome and honestly, HIDDEN could have been a "straight" SF novel (and Kimber An, it's not Love-Graphic.)
The reason I bring this up is that Dorchester is (to the best of my knowledge) the "Creator" of Futuristics and as such, has often been considered fluffy. There's nothing fluffy about HIDDEN. There was nothing fluffy about Colby Hodge's TWIST either, also in the same Shomi line.
I'm just hoping Shomi doesn't go the way of Bombshell. I loved the books I read in that line. But the publisher (Silhoutte/HQN) clearly didn't understand the readership.
~Linnea
PS: I bounced from Bantam Spectra to Bantam Dell, though I'm still edited by Spectra, which is the hard SF imprint there.
Additionally, Science Fiction Romance falls victum to Trend Hell more often because of it being crammed under the Paranormal Romance umbrella. (((sigh)))
Kimber An, this is a brilliant analysis. ::Linnea smacks self on forehead:: IMHO nothing will sink a genre faster than Trend Hell. ~Linnea
The SHOMI line makes my inner Chihuahua chase her tail with savage glee. I recently read Twist (she made me cry near the end, damn her!).
And the covers. Yummy.
Hmmm. That is a good question when you're mixing those two genres. My publisher, The Wild Rose Press, only publishes romance, but in a wide variety of genres. They do publish science fiction romance, but don't have a separate division for it, so for now it goes under their fantasy line. Probably because they don't have enough sci-fi submissions yet.
But I think publishers who do science fiction would be the best place to combine the genres, maybe that would validate it more than if a traditional romance publisher took it on. But then there's that problem of real sci-fi readers who don't want romance in their stories.
Well, I think there are constraining expectations all around. When I first wrote FALLEN, it was a mystery with a romance subplot and it was impossible to place. The SF people said it couldn't be SF because it had fallen angels, and the fantasy people said it couldn't be fantasy because it had radiation poisoning and fallout. And I thought this was incredibly weird, because to me it was a story, and it seemed plausible to me that in a future society in which radiation mutation is rampant, they'd assume that fallen angels were mutants - not angels.
I had long talks with many editors and lots of strange ideas came out. In the end, I suggested to Anna Genoese, who loved the book, that I switch the main plot to the romance and make the murder be the subplot, and she bought it (right before she left Tor).
But to my astonishment, it says Paranormal Romance on the spine. I think, really, that publishers and booksellers don't know what to do with these books, and that as there get to be more of them, the marketing will be more refined.
At least I hope so!
Deborah
aka Claire
Nathalie, thanks for your kind words, and for your frankness. You hit on my concern about the perception that love & rivets is mutually exclusive.
I mean, look at historical romances. There's a lot of historical knowledge packed into those stories. The same smarts readers use for historical romances are the same smarts they'd use for SFR.
Anne, I know I've stumbled across surprising finds any number of times. It definitely pays to be looking in unexpected places.
Kimber An, you're hired!
Mfitz, I heard something about Luna too, but now I can't remember if it was the line ending or the number of books decreasing. But mass market paperbacks are definitely more convenient.
Ella, interesting info--thanks for sharing!
Linnea, good point. I agree, SHOMI books have a grittier edge and the effort put into worldbuilding/sfnal aspects across the different books seems consistent (from the books excerpts I've read). Maybe that's where we'll start to see some hard SF elements here and there.
Susan, those issues definitely come into play. I think this is a time where authors and publishers might experiment with various SFR stories to see how best it can all play out, in terms of balancing the story elements and marketing them.
Btw, Susan, you won! So if you're reading this, send me your address if you want to claim your prize of the futuristic romance giveaway! sfrgalaxy "at" gmail.com
Deborah, thanks for visiting! I appreciate the insight into your experience. While I will happily suspend my disbelief about almost anything in genre fiction, I can understand how challenging it must be for publishers to market books with so many cross genre elements.
As for FALLEN, I can see it under SF/Romance or paranormal, but fantasy would have been a big stretch, at least for me. I thought the SF elements were intriguing and also very prevalent. The angels were a nice touch, but it was the worldbuilding that really caught my eye.
By the way, Linnea Sinclair has started a discussion at Goodreads entitled "Should SFR be a part of PNR?" so if you have a chance, please chime in with your thoughts. Fyi, you'll have to register to comment. Thanks!
Luna's February 2009 release is in stores, so they aren't completely gone. It's a small paperback version of something that's been out a long time in a larger format, so they do those at times. {Smile}
Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
Heather -
Extensive worldlbuilding *is* the stumbling block for traditional romance publishers, for a whole bunch of reasons.
Ooo, I feel a blog post coming on! LOL Look for it Friday
http://www.delacroix.net/blog
Deborah/Claire
Post a Comment