Friday, May 1, 2009


The Only Thing Worse Than A Trashy Romance Novel Is A Bad Science Fiction Novel


Trashy romance novel” is an expression that’s so ubiquitous, it should have its own Wikipedia entry (I checked. Thank goodness, it doesn’t).

The problem isn’t that some novels are trashy or have trashy elements, but that the term has been applied to all romances by the unknowing masses. “Trashy romance novel,” as generalized to the whole genre, is a “misnomer” if there ever was one.

Ding ding ding! And in the same corner, we have the same people using the term “bad science fiction novel.” The genre has a reputation for being weird, not to mention campy, by non-SF fans. Past movies replete with poorly-executed special effects aren’t helping here.

What the above demonstrates is that both science fiction and romance have something in common: namely, they are considered “ghetto” genres in some literary circles. The irony is that some of those circles involve fans of these very same genres.

Picture science fiction as a glass house. Now envision romance as a glass house. Why, then, do they keep lobbying stones at each other? No book is perfect. And one woman’s trash is another man’s treasure where subjectivity reigns supreme.

But let’s face it, there are elements of dubious quality in both genres that have plagued readers for decades, and authors would do well to avoid many of them if at all possible.

We’ve learned much from the past as evidenced by hundreds of pretty darned sophisticated novels in both genres, but if we want to strike terms like “trashy romance novel” and “bad science fiction novel” from our lexicon, one way to start is to air the dirty laundry and have a frank discussion about the flaws.

I’m not sure there’s an entirely straightforward solution, and certainly there’s not an easy one. I also wonder about how seriously readers feel about this issue—enough to make a conscious change? It’s difficult to believe so when certain snark-infested sites keep stoking the fires of discontent, but they aren’t representative of all readers and authors.

However, I think the topic is important enough that it's worth another discussion about it. I envision this post as a chance (like a summit or something!) for all of us to dish on what we consider to be sub-par elements in these books. And at a site about science fiction romance we have both the right and the authority to shred analyze the flaws of both parent genres! To get things rolling, below are a few select ingredients one can find in trashy romance and bad science fiction novels:

You know it’s a trashy romance novel if it has

• Gratuitous sex/nonstop mental lusting
• Purple prose
• Lurid cover
• Outlandish titles (along the lines of The Virgin Mistress’ Secret Baby Daddy)
• Outlandish plot devices (secret baby, The Big Misunderstanding, amnesia)
• Domineering Alpha Males who Must Be Tamed by…
• …Too Stupid To Live Heroines
• Superficial character development and/or that which defies suspension of disbelief (e.g., heroine in a historical who seems to have stepped right out from the pages of Cosmopolitan Magazine)
• Body part euphemisms that defy any kind of language logic
• Cardboard/two dimensional/over the top/obvious villains

You know it’s a bad science fiction novel if it has

• Gratuitous sex, poorly written
• Purple prose
• Pulpy cover art
• Bad science (perhaps the number one complaint)
Bug Eyed Monsters
• Zero character development
• Idiotic moves (e.g., removing one’s helmet in space)
• Too many gimmicks or over-used gimmicks
• Trophy love interests
• Exotic descriptions for the sake of being exotic (e.g., labeling ordinary items a “Zurg Volominator X1,” when it’s really just a toilet).

It’s not to say that there can’t be stories utilizing some (or all?!) of the above elements, because quite a few of those are among the greatest. And I’ve certainly enjoyed my share of “bad SF” when I’m in the right mood. (Heck, I get more entertainment value from repeated viewings of PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE than many big-budget “serious” films. Having said that, I still recognize that Ed Wood’s directing prowess doesn’t exactly match that of Werner Herzog.)

But given the outstanding books published in both genres, the bar is pretty high right now so readers would demand a fresh approach. I mean, a really fresh approach, especially if one is combining the two. I’m thinking something along the lines of, say, “The Virgin Cosmonaut’s Secret Amnesiac Alien Baby Daddy.”

Now, tell me what’s on your list. Can the right books change attitudes, or do you think we will be stuck with genre ghettoizing until the end of Time?

Joyfully yours,

Heather

Postus Scriptus: Romance cover image snagged from the Smart Bitches post Covers Gone Lindsay, Part 3


19 comments:

Rae Lori said...

Great post! Another ingredient to bad SF novels I think is poor/over abundance of worldbuilding. If I can't lose myself in the world because there's no conflict or story to advance the plot while the focus remains on mundane things happening in the world just to be cool; or, like you mentioned, there's outrageous names for the characters or everyday things just to be exotic, then my brain goes splodey.

I hope we won't be stuck with genre ghettoizing. I try to recommend some good reads on both sides but there is indeed that preconceived notion of the other genre being too nerdy/scientific/boring (SF) or too trashy/sex-filled/schmaltzy (Romance) that keeps the two apart. There are a few books that mesh the two beautifully like Clare Dargin's Cold Warriors and I think it's high time for a rise in romantic futuristic adventure novels. It's a new genre, it's fresh and could be the new book trend. Not to mention it's great escape literature that can address some serious social commentary at the same time.

Plus I'd totally read “The Virgin Cosmonaut’s Secret Amnesiac Alien Baby Daddy.”


Frances said...

LOLROF, you really had to look hard to find a cover to illustrate your point, didn't you, Heather. *VEG*


lainey bancroft said...

Brilliant! (Thanks to Delores Haze fro the AW water cooler for leading me here)

But,no, I'm afraid IMHO we will long be stuck with the genre ghettoizing,

Now off to write “The Virgin Cosmonaut’s Secret Amnesiac Alien Baby Daddy.” and test this theory of mine.

Thanks for the inspiration!


Jess Granger said...

Hey, I'm all for constant mental lusting, so long as the lusting is based on genuine attraction and not lusting for the sake of lusting.

But then I like things a little lusty. LOL


Linnea Sinclair said...

You know it’s a bad science fiction novel if it has:
unpronouncable names and nouns with an overabundance of consonants and apostophes. I've actually blogged about this.

"Grab the bgrrt'svzzqut!" Captain Kr'runj'ipo shouted to Commander T'we T'wan T'wondo...


You know it’s a trashy romance novel if it has:
stupid/silly character names that induce non-stop groaning. To wit:

Rock Hardabs let his eyes slide over Tawny Kittenfur's slender form. She was so lovely, even more so than his dead wife, Summertit Winterpure.

(Oh, and flying body parts. His eyes slid... she tossed her head...)

And please don't get me started on erotica authors who insist on taking pen names that would make even a Detroit hooker/stripper run screaming from the room.


Jess Granger said...

Okay, so here's my Romance pet peeve. Characters actually dressed like those old clinch covers. I'm talking puffy white shirts, knee high black boots, and the cloak.

Gotta love me some cloak.

Jess


Cathy in AK said...

But Jess, a puffy white shirt, black boots, billowy cloak (it has to billow, even in space) and a phallic blaster would be SO perfect for space pirate hero, Captain K'jini'gik "Giky" Tightpants.


Susan Macatee said...

Great covers, Heather! LOL. Romance and science fiction do have a lot in common that can make them trashy. I remember all those clinch covers the historical romances had back in the 80s. Broad chested men with long flowing hair with those puffy open shirts revealing their manly assets, while the heroine, whose bodice looked ready to pop swooned in his arms. Embarrassing to say the least. And they were all the same. Like a someone came up with a one-size-fits-all historial romance cover.

I read an interview by Nancy Kress, who writes great science fiction. Her mother had the latest copy of her book displayed on her coffee table and one of her visiting friends asked her when her daughter was going to write a real book.

I think more readers have to read the great romance/science fiction books being released now, before attitudes about both genres will finally change.


Agent Z. said...

Secret babies in spaaaaaaaaace! I wants 'em. Like NOW!


Native Texan said...

Love it, or hate it! I've read more than one of each! (Did I admit that in writing?) If a romantic action adventure in space appeals to you, try my recently released novel, Long Journey to Rneadal. Hopefully, it won't be classified too harshly in either category! lol


BevBB said...

But to be fair to both of these genres, swear to God, I was in the grocery store just a few months ago and glanced over at I guess it was the detective/mystery/thriller section and saw a cover with a big busted blonde woman in a tight dress with a gun pointed at her head.

I just stood there kind of stunned, wondering if I'd suddenly entered a time-warp to the fifties or something. I mean because, you know, romances are the ones with the "bad, covers. Right? ;p


B.G. Sanford said...

Good article and excellent comments. I am a romance writer and before I leave your site, let me tell you something about my new book, "Beth:Love Along The Way...by B.G.Sanford," and just released by Eloquent Books. It's the story of a woman who overcomes all odds and obstacles that life has dealt her, to find real Love.....Along The Way. It's both an amazing and entertaining story, you're sure to enjoy. And if you're so inclined, it can be bought off the internet or have your local book store order it for you.
Good reading friends,
B.G.Sanford
http://www.eloquentbooks.com/BethLoveAlongTheWay.html


Blue Tyson said...

Note though that the SF cover is likely around 1940.

That romance novel might have been last month. ;-)


BevBB said...

Note though that the SF cover is likely around 1940.

That romance novel might have been last month. ;-)


Really? I'll give you the SF cover, but have you actually gone into the stores recently and scanned the shelves? Try to find that cover - or a version thereof - amidst all the paranormal vampires and weres, not to mention cartoons they're putting on romances.

Just saying. I sometimes have a difficult time finding the romances amongst the science fiction, fantasy, mystery and thriller novels nowadays.


NathalieGray said...

Ref comment #12...Heather, you're a bigger woman than I am. That's why I don't have a blog, you know, because as much as I like people, the drive-bys make my inner Chihuahua want to gnaw her paw off.


Heather Massey said...

@Blue Tyson Yah, I know. I'll admit that due to time constraints I didn't spend an extraordinary amount of time searching for an image. But there's no denying the appeal of that woman's hat :-)

Nathalie, when I changed the comments section, that's one of the risks. It makes me chuckle more than anything, because subtle it ain't.

BevBB, indeed, there is so much cover drama going on right now. Covers are a big part of the book package. I can understand the need to have covers that sell books, but there's also something to be said for having covers that make books worth collecting. Sometimes the two coincide; many times they don't.


Lisa said...

The Virgin Cosmonaut’s Secret Amnesiac Alien Baby Daddy!L've 't!

@Blue Tyson: FYI, that Romance cover was from Johanna Lindsey's KEEPER OF THE HEART -- from *1993* So, no, not last month.


Anonymous said...

I agree, most of the good stuff just doesn't come around too often. When it does, maybe it will put a new spin real topics of interest like say finding a cure for cancer?


Esteban said...

I think The Grundle is on to something, people with a strong heart and stomach should check it out. He has a knack for diving right in, and he definitely doesnt leave out any details. People who are very conservative in their descriptions of sexual acts/encounters will provbably not like his style, but those who feel normal novels leave "A little something"out will obviously enjoy his orgasmic word play.

http://thegrundle.blogspot.com


Post a Comment


 

All original content © Heather M., 2010. All rights reserved. Blog hosted by Blogger.com using the ButterflyMagic Template.