CYA: What Should A Cover Do?
This is a fast post because this is really just a continuation of the previous post, but I do want to ask this:
A cover should reflect the book so a buyer knows what she or he is buying. In anything.
We already have a shorthand of kind because publishers put the same kind of cover on the same kind of book–those cartoon covers on chick lit, for example. After The Firm came out, all legal novels had marble on the cover. It’s a shorthand way of saying, “This book is like other books you like” and it’s smart marketing until they all start to look alike, but I digress.
Let’s assume we are not going to bar rape from romance because we’re not. The marketplace determines what’s going in a book; it sells what readers buy. But it’s a damn good argument that people should know what they’re getting into when they open a book.
So what cover elements are we talking about here? Warning labels? (I changed my mind on that back to no, but I’m interested in the discussion.) What’s shorthand for “there’s rape in here”? And does that shorthand also work on books like To Have and To Hold?
Basically, how do we tell readers what’s going on inside the book by what we put on the cover?
And also whatever you wanted to say about the previous discussion. This could have been a comment on the last post, so treat it that way, please.
To Stressed out Cherry from previous post:
I can’t believe I’m going to say this in such a public forum, but I am an addict. Recovering for many, many years and chemcial dependancy really doesn’t have to do with control. It is the only diesease on this planet that tells you, you don’t have one. Sure, there are things I need to control in my life, like stay the hell away from situations that put my sobriety at risk, but it’s not about control. If control had anything to do with I would have been able to put the plug in the jug the first time landed myself in some serious trouble. Or when I damn near died, but I didn’t. It was years later and I kept on using until I hit rock bottom. Believe me, there were times I was staring down a bottle of JD thinking, I really don’t want to do this, but I did. The addiction had me beat.
Now, about covers. I guess my issue here is that as an avid reader, I kind of already know what I’m looking at. Sure, as you (jenny) pointed out, publishers do things that help guide us, like the legal thing or chick-lit thing. Hey, if there is a dead body on the cover, I’m game.
I suppose I wouldn’t have an issue with warning labels. Not my call. They do it with the movies. I have kids under 13 and well, the 13 year old has seen two R rated movies. My call. I’m the parent.
I mean, if we pick up a horror book, we know it might have some weird shit. A romance? Maybe some good sex and a HEA ending. A Thriller? Sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for something to happen. Erotica? Hopefully something kinky. And the list goes on.
I might not be the smartest tool in the shed, but I think I can figure it out all by my little self.
Because these are books and the people buying them are readers, the back cover copy should indicate the content using text, a story to tell the story inside. I think a warning label veers too close to infantalizing readers.
Warning labels on romance novels will not stop sex crimes any more than warning labels on music stopped ugly speech. And quieting art, even art you hate, helps to silence every voice, not just the ones you don’t like. That’s why when I see a certain blonde goddess’s face on a book with an inflammatory, one word title, I groan inside but I never turn the book over, which I always want to do. She has the right to say what she thinks and I have the right to say she’s wrong.
I suppose I wouldn’t have an issue with warning labels. Not my call. They do it with the movies. I have kids under 13 and well, the 13 year old has seen two R rated movies. My call. I’m the parent.
Oh, but what a perfect point — those labels are primarily for CHILDREN, not grown-ups. As in “parental guidance” or “restricted.”
I thought the person in the other thread who quoted from the blurb for CtC had a great point. We know the heroine is a “courtesan” (i.e. prostitution); we know that “Kylemore destroys her plans for a respectable lief when he discovers her safe haven” (ah, destruction); we know “he kidnaps her, sweeping her away to his hunting lodge in Scotland, where he vows to bend her to his will” (force, force, force, + international abduction). We know that “There he seduces her anew . . . and though she still dreams of escape” (held against her will), “she knows she can never flee the unexpected, unwelcome love for the proud, powerful lover who claims her both body and soul.” (obsession + love = not a light romp). All that’s missing, IMO, is how really, really, really, really sorry Justin eventually is and how much he changes. But that’s not the stuff that we’re really talking about with the labeling, is it?
As for the covers themselves, well, I’ve always believed they contradict any notion of truth in advertising, so hack away at those babies.
A romance? Maybe some good sex and a HEA ending. [...] I might not be the smartest tool in the shed, but I think I can figure it out all by my little self.
The thing is that romance contains so many sub-genres and there’s a huge range of tones. Some romance readers seek out ‘darker’ but fantasy/escapist books, others want romantic comedy, some want contemporary with gritty realism, others want historical escapism. That’s the sort of thing that can be indicated using the cover, but it isn’t if the art department slap on cartoon covers indiscriminately, or if there’s a clinch cover on every book that particular publisher puts out.
Jenny’s got some weird foreign covers, and I find the cartoon-style UK ones for Faking It and Fast Women particularly bad. But I really like the woman leaping into the air on the UK Welcome to Temptation cover. It gives me a modern with retro edge, woman seeking freedom (possibly sexual freedom) sort of feel. Bet Me’s blue cover with a shoe says ‘almost chick lit - so modern, independent heroine, but romantic and fairytale at the same time’.
So, What’s shorthand for “there’s rape in here”? And does that shorthand also work on books like To Have and To Hold? It seems to me that, in general, darker covers tend to suggest that something shady/dangerous is going on. Purples, dark reds, black all suggest either paranormal or crime. Then there’s the positioning of the characters. If you’ve got a woman alone looking threatened with a backdrop of an isolated castle, you can be fairly sure you’re looking at an old ‘gothic’ romance. This is a modern version of the ‘gothic’ cover, on a modern romance. If the cover is dark and/or it looks like the hero is about to rip the heroine’s bodice, I’d be more prepared to find rape/forced seduction of the heroine by the hero. [Actually, that one's a bit of a problem, because some publishers seem to put that bodice-ripper-style cover on lots of books, regardless of content.] If the rape happened in the past, or is perpetrated by someone else, one might have the hero and heroine looking more in harmony, but something to indicate threat coming from elsewhere e.g. a darker background, or the heroine alone, under threat. If a romance has a baby on the cover, I would tend to think it’ll be a relatively sweet romance, probably involving a secret baby. If the focus is really on the hero, but he’s not a rapist, then I’d be cued in to that by one of those torso covers. If there’s a picture of a house and flowers, I’d think ’sweet’ unless the house was particularly strange-looking/threatening. If a historical has characters in anachronistic clothing, I’m more likely to think it’s a wallpaper historical than if a painting is used.
I’m certainly no expert, but I think we do ‘read’ the covers for clues about the content and those would be my interpretations of some of the elements of designs I’ve seen on romance covers.
Those who have ‘issues’ (incest/abuse/rape survivors etc) live in a world full of triggers. You can either go crazy or you can find ways to cope. Granted, one of my favorite forums even blanks out certain mild ‘trigger’ words so posters won’t be hurt. But then again, that’s why they’re there— to share, get better, heal.
But you don’t expect that coddling from the world at large. Big girls in the big world have to find ways to deal with reality. And often, my trigger is your turn-on.
Anyhow, romance books can be very therapuetic and even healing for those with past trauma. By proxy, you can see how healthy people act in sane and healthy relationships. OR, learn why a bad relationship is bad. Or roll your eyes when someone is clueless about how ‘you’ would react in a certain situation.
Or, for many/most, they’re simply diversion, a happy escape or an exploration of another place.
They can also contain things that aren’t good for a specific reader. Do the books need to be labeled? I don’t think so myself. Because, like I said, your hot spot may be my happy place. But then again, I almost never read a book that I’m not totally familiar with the author or that I haven’t thoroughly researched on the Web.
I remember the “Rosemary Rogers” gang rape days and I’m glad they’re over. And no, I won’t read RR because I pretty much know what to expect. There are other authors in that catagory that I just don’t read.
I do think some topics, like rape, incest etc can be handled well depending on the author. Reality isn’t neat or clean or easy. But the reader IS purchasing something and does expect something in return. If that expectation is a happy respite from day to day life, then it is the READER’S responsibility to make sure that they’ve made an informed choice and purchased a book that fits their expectations.
This is ESPECIALLY important if reading for a specific reason and with clear triggers to avoid.
Even so, if they find that the book is offensive or hurtful, they can do what I do….. burn it in the trash pile and go write a scathing review.
Works for me.
I read this last night in Story, by Robert McKee:
“Lastly, given story’s power to influence, we need to look at the issue of an artist’s social responsibility. I believe we have no responsibility to cure social ills or renew faith in humanity …”
He then says: “We have only one responsibility: to tell the truth.”
McKee suggests to study your story and extract your controlling idea. But you must also ask yourself “Is this the truth?” “Do I believe in the meaning of my story?” If the answer is no, toss it and start again.”
So back to rape in romance, if the storyteller believes that the rapist can be redeemed she has the right to write that truth. If that isn’t her heartfelt belief, she’s lying to herself and to her audience. And I think it will be felt by the reader. Rape in romance other than by the hero is fine in romance because it deals with life and women’s issues, but we want to see the rapist caught and punished, he definitely doesn’t get a HEA. I personally think writing rape as “romantic” (that is having the hero be the rapist and be forgiven by the heroine by her falling in love with him) is not something I would care to read.
However, the author and the book in question apparently wrote a good strong story and it was a historical and times were different back then. Maybe it’s a question of being honest and true to the time period. When I got on my high horse a few days ago on this thread, I had mistakenly believed it was a contemporary romance and I saw red. I have since then, read reviews of the story and believe there was text that explained the darker side of the book. So therefore, it is the reader’s choice to buy or not.
I was never much of a romance reader until recent years and found most of the earlier covers seemed to imply rape (can I say bodice ripper here) so I found them offensive. I have many writer friends who write Erotica. The covers, while titillating for some readers (oooh, man candy)I find amusing. Perhaps even laughable. Would I read one travelling from L.A. to NYC? Hell no.
A cover depicting the darker aspects of life and emotion would probably best serve a romance with dark elements. Along with appropriate text on BCC. You wouldn’t expect beautiful flowing gowns, a handsome smiling hero, hearts and flowers. Anything that depicts the darker side. “Oh no, we aren’t going back to bodice rippers are we?”
I think some shorthand on the cover would not be amiss. Might be the way to satisfy both camps. I think the gal slung over his arm with her boddice ripped would be a good clue that there might be elements. But they’d have to dispense with the blue eyeshadow or no one would take it seriously.
By the same token a murder weapon or blood or the like could indicate violence. There are other themes that might squick different people out … marketing folks might have to get creative. But then that’s what they get paid for.
To give an example of a cover I thought was totally misleading, from a romance I’ve blogged about, Fallen Angel has a cover with a pastel pink background, lace and a shiny metal Cupid charm. To me, that does NOT say ‘rapist hero at work’. It does mention that the heroine wants ’sweet revenge’, but she never actually gets it, and a ’sweet’ revenge, on that cover, sounds like she’d trick him into selling her a puppy or something like that. And the back-cover copy was no help either. It too goes on and on about the heroine’s desire for revenge and just describes the hero as a bit of a rogue who’s good at seduction. It’s also wrong because it says he doesn’t want her affection, but in the novel he says it’s love at first sight and the blurb says he wants her castle, and the reader soon learns that he doesn’t:
Beautiful, fiery Scotswoman Maddy Sinclair held one man responsible for the scandal that ruined her family: Viscount Deveryn. The unrepentant rogue known as The Fallen Angel was a cad with a heart of ice. But when Maddy fell blindly into his powerful embrace, she was unaware the man who kissed her so skillfully was her sworn enemy - until it was too late. Though her heart may be lost, her will to foil Deveryn’s scheme to steal her legacy is strong…
Deveryn, whose reputation with the ton’s ladies left no doubt that he cared little for true love, certainly hadn’t come looking for it in Scotland. He had his sights set on Maddy’s castle and her tempting beauty - not her affections. That changed as he found himself challenged by her wit, her guile, and her ability to turn the tables on his best-laid plans, offering him a lesson in seduction that proved Heaven does indeed exist on earth - and that perhaps only one thing can redeem a fallen angel.
In fact, that sounds like she possibly seduces him. Someone who does have a rape fantasy and likes a domineering alpha hero would possibly love this, but would they guess that from the cover? I doubt it. And I certainly didn’t realise it had rape in it. I don’t think it helps anyone when the cover and blurb are misleading.
Jennifer Talty said: “If control had anything to do with I would have been able to put the plug in the jug the first time landed myself in some serious trouble. Or when I damn near died, but I didn’t… Believe me, there were times I was staring down a bottle of JD thinking, I really don’t want to do this, but I did. The addiction had me beat.”
How is this different than what an abused woman is going through. She can tell you intellectually, in a quiet moment, that she knows she needs to get out, yet within days she’s back with him. Looking at it from a pyschological point of view, doesn’t it at least have the appearance of addiction or illness? In Walker’s Cycle of Violence Theory (Berkowitz, Carol D. “Recognizing and Responding to Domestic Violence.” Pediatric Annals 34.5 (2005) page 396, paragraph 9) the phases included in the cycle of abuse are tension building, acute battering, and the honeymoon phase. It is in the honeymoon phase that the battered woman begins to “negotiate” with herself in order to make sense of what has happened. When reconciled, the abuser is on his best behavior until the cycle repeats. As with substance abuse, it’s not a matter of willpower. As with substance abuse, it is often necessary to hit rock bottom before the victim is able to take steps to get out. As with substance abuse, rock bottom is often fatal instead. You said earlier that it’s not about love. Well to the abused, it is. It is precisely that chemical dependancy that love produces that makes it so hard to leave.
Have some women gotten a raw deal in the courts? Yes.
Have some women lost custody of their children? Yes.
Have some women been so financially insecure that they felt the only recourse was to return to the abuser? Yes.
Have some women been hunted down by the abuser? Yes.
But none of that explains why a woman with none of these impediments would return to a relationship of abuse. And none of that explains how 100,000 men are documented victims of abuse every year and why 500 or so will stay until they are killed.
The victims of abuse (both male and female) are just as ill as their abusers. The “solution” if there is one, is mandatory treatment for the victim, and mandatory prison (with treatment) for the perpetrator of the crime.
Any cop whose had any experience with DV will tell you that the victim is as much a danger to him as the perpetrator.
Tell me I’m wrong on this. I’ve been dealing with this for years, and viewing it as an illness/addiction is the only thing that makes sense to me. If you can explain it in a way that will help me better understand the nature of abuse, I’m all ears. But don’t tell me she doesn’t have options, because every time I present a solution, she presents a new roadblock. Except for the two or three days after she’s been beat up, she doesn’t want out.
- - - - -
Back on topic: what is it that we’re now proposing with regard to book covers? A code that says “There be rape here”? Isn’t that regency historicals? It’s not like there is a rape sub-genre. Who would want to write, much less read, that sub-genre?
My worry is the reader who feels betrayed because I wrote something she didn’t want to read. And do they realize that if I ever decide to write about a rape, I can tell you it could very well be more traumatic to write than it would to read (though neither compares to living it for real).
But since I will probably never have a rape scene in one of my books, what other subject matter should I stear clear of, or at least warn the reader about? Should I warn her about possible political topics? Regardless which side of the aisle I come from or only if I’m on the other side?
Is there a list somewhere?
Thought I’d be able to walk away and keep my big old mouth shut. Nope. One of these days, maybe.
The old saying “don’t judge a book by it’s cover” keeps coming to mind. Not that cover shouldn’t be considered, because it should. My background (if you could call a college degree and a few part time jobs a background) is in Business Education with a concentration in Marketing and Sales. Cover is very important. A nice shiny cover will help sales. Smart back cover copy will help sales. We all want sales. But that is advertising.
And since for the most part I do beleive the publishers do a decent job of giving the covers those “general” labels of this is romance, or this is a thriller, or this is military book, I honestly don’t judge a book by it’s cover, but it’s content.
Now, the arguement, I believe, has more to do with how to go about telling the reader that the book “might” have a subject matter that “might” strick a “personal cord” with that particular reader. Sheesh, I’m not sure I make any sense. That I believe is impossible. I have lots hot buttons, if you all hadn’t noticed, but they are mine. I own them. If I find something troublesome, then that is my issue, not the person sitting next to me who might enjoy it.
Anyone who has written back cover copy can tell you how hard it is to get the essence of the book down two those two small paragraphs. Or one paragraph. And, do you want to give the whole thing away?
Again, circles here. Sorry.
Bryan - I will agree that the victim (like a co-dependent to an alcoholic) has some issues that need to be treated, but what I disagreed with is that they should be mandated to it. You can lead a horse to water, but if they aint thirsty, they aint gonna drink. You have to tear down years of one way of thinking and rebuild that thinking a different way. And trust me that isn’t easy. I know, I’ve been there.
And you can’t save them. That is a very co-dependant way of thinking. If only I had done this. Or pushed them. Or made them leave. Nope. That doesn’t work either. It’s a vicious cycle.
Yes. The victim needs help, both getting out of the envirnment and with rebuilding their way of thinking. Once hit, sometimes you believe you deserve it. Hard habit to break. You’re self-esteme is gone. You’re self worth no longer exists.
I have a lot more I’d like to say on this subject, but it’s getting a bit too personal for me. I know, you are all laughing based on what I have said so far. But there is a lot more to this than I am willing to share here. It’s not an easy subject.
Book covers - hey, I’ll read just about anything as long as it’s well crafted. I like stepping out of my box.
If I open my Southern Living Cookbook and find, in the middle of my Tuna Noodle Casserole recipe, a rape scene, I’d be surprised. And very pissed! Because it’s a cookbook dangit!
I wouldn’t be surprised to find blurbs about how to skin, bone or fillet a tuna. Or even a whole chapter on tuna fishing. Or dolphins for that matter. It would all be in context.
Same goes for a romance novel. There are certain things that can happen in a book that while I’d like to be prepared for, wouldn’t surprise me. In the context of the book type. Granted, I did get a really good bread pudding recipe from one book (that I digress) Anyhow, when one buys a book, and knows the type, they know within a range of what to expect.
Honestly, I hate surprises (the bad kind) and I go out of my way to be prepared and forwarned. So I do read a lot of book reviews, know my authors, get to know what certain reviewers like and I’ve pegged the ones who ‘think’ like me. That’s all a reader can do to invest wisely— in time, energy and money, when getting a book.
Jen, not laughing. Listening and learning.
Jen, I respect your opinion tremendously, and since we have reached the point where you are no longer comfortable (not to mention we’ve been OT for a long time and still haven’t been yelled at so I don’t want to push it much longer) this will be the last comment I post on DV.
Whatever the underlying reasons, it is the screwed up dynamic of the relationship between the abuser and the abused that makes it so difficult for an outsider to deal with. The cops don’t take DV seriously? No wonder when the victim will put up the bail for the perp and toss all the “help literature” into the trash. The courts don’t take DV seriously? No wonder when most of the time the victim drops the charges or refuses to testify against him. Society doesn’t take DV seriously? No wonder when society busts its ass to find a way to get her out safely only to have her back out at the last minute, or return three days later.
What’s left? Either do nothing, or let her know where the shelter is and hope she wises up, or make treatment mandatory and accept the fact that even that will fail most of the time.
I apologize to Jenny for hijacking; to Jen for pushing just a bit further; and to anyone else I may have hurt or offended. As I mentioned, this has been, and continues to be, a very difficult subject in my life with no easy answers.
The last stage in healing is Acceptance, right? That’s where I am. I accept that I’ve done all I can do, and I accept that she will wind up dead, hospitalized, or live a life of misery. But there is that glimmer of hope…
Found my way over here from SmartBitches . . . I guess my whole problem is that I don’t want to read a book where the “hero” rapes the heroine*. PERIOD (and I never thought Vidal would go through with it either; the way I read that scene he honestly believes she’s a coy little hussy who will fall into his arms once he proves that he’s just as willing to have her as her sister). Back to the topic at hand: it’s impossible to “vote with my wallet” if I don’t know before I buy the book that it contains this HEA-ruining element (bookstores, in my experience, don’t let you return a used book because you didn’t like it). So what are my options? Write the publisher and demand a refund? Put the book through the shredder and mail the resulting confetti to the editor responsible just to make myself feel better? What?
*And the whole Catherine Coulter “rape is historical” thing makes snakes pop out of my head. I don’t care what era we’re talking about, a man who forces himself on women is simply not hero material, IMO.
Laura V. - Excellent blog post. I’m going to go back and leave a comment in a bit. Hard to cook dinner and do this at the same time. But I really see your point. That cover is very misleading.
Also, I can understand you’re point about all the sub-genre’s and tones and that covers and should reflect or give hint of what is inside. Maybe it’s being an avid reader that I feel confident that I can figure out what is between the covers by all the clues given. Either way, it should represent what inside, but I don’t see how it can deal with every little thing.
My book Dark Water deals with abuse, but you wouldn’t know it by the cover. I’m still writing back cover. Guess I will have to think about that one.
Of course the help info will get tossed in the trash. To keep it means another beating. Must remember that sometimes it’s about survival - even if on the outside it doesn’t look that way. But the abused knows the triggers and tries their best to avoid them.
I don’t think we need warnings either on the front cover on in the back cover copy. As so many have said before me, we’re adults, not children.
However, I can’t count the number of times the front cover has had absolutely NO relationship to the story. Admittedly, I enjoy historicals and they seem to be the worst offenders. One pictured a women in a dress in front of a barn when she was a trail guide akin to mountain men and never owned a dress. Another was a western that pictured a cowboy and an indian (sorry not pc), when it was more about a Catholic priest in the west. LOL And as for reading them in public, I’d really prefer non-representational art. Shoot, I won’t even buy a book in the store if it’s got a particularly sexy cover on it. Yeah, I know, that’s what sells, but it puts me off.
To side-step Bryan and Jen, because I like them both so much, and there is too much to say about their respective arguments, and to get back to topic…
I commented on the other post that a romance read, for me, is a great big coconut cupcake, pure indulgence. I want to laugh, get sentimental, get a little suspense, get turned on, but never ever do I want to be horrified or shocked. I also don’t want to fight my repulsion of rape to rationalize a hero’s actions. If in the story there is a rape fantasy, that is one thing, if in the story there is a rape, that is something entirely different. How can adultery be such a deal breaker in romance, yet a rape between the hero/heroine not be? One is a crime of morals, one is a felony. Aaaannyway, back to the question at hand, do I want to know if there is rape in the central story, you bet your bippy I do. There are ways to convey this on BCC, or flap info, or the blurb. I’m not saying I wouldn’t still buy the book, but I like to be prepared, especially in a romance, because quite honestly, I’m not usually thinking, “Oh a love story, I wouldn’t be surprised if the heroine gets violently overcome in there.”
You know, I’m not sure it is hijacking because I think it goes to the passion and the pain behind the arguments.
For a lot of people, this argument is not about romance novels, it’s about romanticizing a brutal crime, and beyond that about romanticizing a brutal lover. It’s sociology not publishing. And I absolutely understand that. Any book that romanticizes abuse makes me scream. But for some reason I have a LOT more trouble with verbal/emotional abuse than I do with rape. I read a book where a hero is viciously destroying the heroine with words, making her feel guilty or ashamed or stupid, and I go up in flames, for the same reason I think (guessing) that those who want rape barred go up: personal experience.
But I don’t want that barred from the genre. I just don’t want to read it. Which is why I stay away from romances with that cover copy about he’s domineering and she tames him. If he’s domineering, he’s a jerk and I don’t want to read about him. Millions of readers disagree with me. I’m good with that.
I’m trying to think of why this is such a hot button. The Flame and the Flower is still in print and nobody said, “Stop printing that.” To Have and To Hold is still in print and people are using it as an example of great romance, which it is. What happened that THIS book set off the firestorm. The author did not write the book to cause controversy; she’s stunned by the reaction. She wrote the story she wanted to tell and that was the way it came to her, and good for her for telling the truth on the page, as McKee says. Is it because TF&TF and TH&TH are old books, and they’re not a threat because people weren’t writing those in mainstream romance any more? Or is it more that they were just under the radar, nobody knew about them? Because the vast majority of people who are arguing this, including me, haven’t read the book.
As for covers and cover copy, the author may have no control over it. I’ve been really unhappy with some of my covers and been overruled because marketing liked them. I’m with a great publisher now at SMP so my covers and cover copy there are reflective of the book, but I know when the little hardcover of Anybody But You came out, that publisher put a pale green cover on it with a puppy, and it looked like a YA. I was really concerned about that. The pink cover Laura’s talking about horrifies me; what the hell were they thinking? But I know marketing was probably thinking, “Pretty pink cover, it’ll sell well to women.”
It does sound as if Avon did everything it could to signal that this was a dark romance with force in it. I think the problem is that people interpret that as the Rochester hero more than rape. I’m just not sure why that emotionally abusive hero is all right and the rapist is not.
I’m not a person who buys or shops based on a cover. Can I say I’ve NEVER been influenced by a cover? No. But by and large it doesn’t affect me largely because I read so much that I’m purchasing based on recs, reviews and authors I’ve read before and the cover doesn’t play a part of my shopping process.
Blurbs don’t always reflect what the content of the book is either. I just read DIRTY by Megan Hart. It’s labeled an erotic romance. I had a very personal and visceral reaction to the book which had nothing to do with the blurb or the romance or the sex. Had this had a warning of some of the things I’m sensitive to I might not have read the book and would be the poorer for it.
If a person has sensitive triggers especially regarding sexuality when reading a romance novel I truly think the best advice to that shopper/reader is to research the book and reviews on line, in stores, and reader groups before purchase.
I don’t believe there is or ever could be a comprehensive enough system to label or use an acceptable shorthand that will clearly warn readers about content.
Amazing responses to a very involved subject.
I can’t see any simple answers, because in the end, the cover and blurb are done by marketing people who may see sales as more important than accurately potraying the subject of the book. I’m sure that badly done book covers are the bane of the writer’s existence. I don’t pay all that much attention to book covers. I generally will read specific authors whom I trust, without ever seeing the cover. Covers and back blurb only come into play when I am looking for a new author.
Tell me I’m wrong on this. I’ve been dealing with this for years, and viewing it as an illness/addiction is the only thing that makes sense to me. If you can explain it in a way that will help me better understand the nature of abuse, I’m all ears. But don’t tell me she doesn’t have options, because every time I present a solution, she presents a new roadblock. Except for the two or three days after she’s been beat up, she doesn’t want out.
The person in your life may very well have certain psychological issues that keep her in an abusive relationship despite the availability of safe and viable options. I’m only suggesting a certain caution in generalizing about women in DV relationship as addicted or ill, because the lack of a standard victim profile reflects the diversity of circumstances and issues around DV and its victims. And I understand how difficult it is to entertain the idea that someone would freely choose to be abused; it goes against what we think of as a “normal” survival instinct. I’m sorry you have been unsuccessful in your attempts to aid the victim in your life — in its own way, your position can become that of a victim, as well.
In a way, I think this conversation mirrors that whole “how does Romance affect readers” convo, because there’s a similar tension between the individual and the general, as well, and either analysis can swing either way depending on any given point we want to argue. And there’s likely no solution that will please everyone. It might help if we could actually decide on what we see as at stake here: is it the freedom of authors, the integrity of the genre, the agency of readers, the freest exercise of choice by all, truth in advertising, the relationship between books and readers? Whatever we privilege will shape the terms of the discussion and any potential solutions.
Jenny wrote: “But for some reason I have a LOT more trouble with verbal/emotional abuse than I do with rape.” And then further said, “I’m just not sure why that emotionally abusive hero is all right and the rapist is not.”
For me the verbal and emotional abuse can be far worse than the physical, but I also think they go hand in hand sometimes. Sometimes it starts off with the verbal abuse, tearing you down and keeping you down. Then the physical. What is really hard about the verbal/emotional abuse is that it isn’t always tangable. Yes, you can hear the words and feel the results, but it’s not a backhand across the cheekbone or a blow to the gut.
As far as the dominate male in a book, I kind of like them. I know, I’ve got some weird things going on here. With that said, I don’t like it when he puts down the heroine, or uses that dominering/controling personality to control the heroine. I like the heroine to be strong. Her own woman. Capable of making her own decisions. I guess I like the strong silent type of man. A man of conviction and that can sometimes come across as controling. I guess that would be an Alpha kind of guy, but not the kind you (Jenny) are referring to above. That type of guy can kiss my ass (fictional or not).
I have no control over my covers, but I have to write my own back cover copy. This makes me think twice about what I’m saying about my own books.
Be advised - I’m a reader, not a writer, so what follows is jumbled.
Before I forget - Bryan and Jen-T… very brave of you both to share your personal experiences in a public forum. No easy answers or band-aid fixes for these issues.
And speaking of “band-aid” fixes. I’ve always thought myself against mandatory ratings/labels and I totally agree that as the reader I’m free to pickup the book in the store, look at the pictures, read the back cover, read the first chapter to see if I’m hooked, and I can read the last chapter to see if I’m gonna get my HEA. If the book looks promising enough and i buy it, I’m still free to slam the thing against the wall when I run across something that crosses the line - my line.
I’ve been thinking of some awesome books/series that I’ve read that have some squick factors to them - Whitney My Love by McNaught (rape), Anne Stuart’s recent book with male/male sexual relationship reference, and finally the J.D. Robb In Death series (rape/incest/murders/violence). I’m not sure how to “warn” a reader that those books have tough subject matter. But I do know the subject matter tells lots of stuff about the characters in the books.
What am I trying to say? Would a particular label of some sort have helped me to choose the books - or to avoid the books? I don’t know. I can say they are on my keeper shelves. And, I’m still reading about Eve and her constant struggle to keep moving foward even when the past haunts her still.
Totally jumping to the other side of labeling/rating. I do know that as a reader, I appreciate the sensuality ratings, and the topic headers used at Ellora’s Cave. Because the books can be searched by favorite author, sensuality rating, and Topic, I’ve avoided books that would cross my line, and have found some that were just what I was hoping to find.
Thanks for the space.
I’m just not sure why that emotionally abusive hero is all right and the rapist is not.
I’ve been asking this question in many venues, and as yet no one has answered me, really. And what’s amazing to me is that IMO emotional abuse is MUCH more correlative to real life than rape in Romance, which I often think is more symbolic in its presence. There’s a scene in Linda Howard’s Dream Man, for example, where Dane flips Marlie onto her stomach and enters her “with battering force” — Marlie, the rape and torture survivor. I could make all sorts of arguments for how Howard is trying to distinguish “bad” force from “good” force, but what about the hero who almost kills the heroine at least three times during one book, at one point shoving her unconscious body underwater?
The very inconsistency with which these issues are received by readers is, IMO, one of the strongest reasons to think carefully about the wisdom of any labeling beyond a thoughtful cover blurb. Beyond all the readers who say “I am better for reading the book that shook me out of my comfortable sensibilities,” there is every possibility for the reader who doesn’t want that disruption to refrain from buying or stop reading at any moment. Because can any reader know with absolute certainty what they will and won’t want to read until they’re confronted with it? And can any label or warning or code language adequately encompass the tastes and interpretive filters of more than a handful of readers at any one time?
And I wonder: does the concept of labeling seem more comfortable in a genre like Romance because there is a general tendency to see the books as primarily *commercial products* rather than as *creative works*?
It does sound as if Avon did everything it could to signal that this was a dark romance with force in it.
From looking at the front cover of CtC, it seems as though they did. Both the back cover blurb (in a coded but understandable way) and the front cover indicate that this book is not a light, happy, comedy of manners or about a hot-but-mutual-seduction.
I think the problem is that people interpret that as the Rochester hero more than rape.
I’m not sure that anyone’s actually said they’ve been misled by the cover or blurb of CtC. From what I can tell, anyone joining the debate online (and it’s been hard to miss
) knows exactly what the hot-button issue is in this particular romance. But what has sparked the debate is, I think, as you suggested when you asked ‘Is it because TF&TF and TH&TH are old books, and they’re not a threat because people weren’t writing those in mainstream romance any more?’ that this is a new romance novel that deals with this theme. Eileen Dreyer was quite explicit about this when she stated that her worry was that this romance might signal a return to the type of old romances you mention: she said that ‘the spectre of the abusive hero has reared its unspeakably ugly head again’. I have the sense that the romance writing community went through a period of soul-searching about this topic after three romance authors were murdered by their abusive husbands in the period from 1996-1999. It’s certainly the impression I got from reading this 1999 article in Salon.
It could also be about the image of romance. Again, just my impression, but I have a feeling that romance authors have been doing a lot in the past decade or more to try to counteract the idea that romance = bodice rippers. Rapist heroes are associated with bodice-rippers, romance authors have, in general not liked their genre being labelled that way, so something that might damage the image of the genre may be worrying to many people, in addition to their concerns about domestic abuse and rape and the possible messages that could be taken from romances in which heroes are abusive to/rape the heroine.
I’m just not sure why that emotionally abusive hero is all right and the rapist is not.
It’s certainly not fine with me.
Wow! Laura, just came from the blog link you left above. That is some interesting information. Thank you. will go now, digest it a bit.
And Jenny, I’m with you on the abusive hero, he doesn’t destroy physically but mentally, and I think that can be just as devastating for a woman, he can strip her down to the bone with caustic comment. So long as the author shows the heroine’s struggle, and that she has the strength to walk away, or fall in love with someone else, then I’ll keep reading. I just can’t abide by her staying, and worse, falling in love with him, or at least calling it love. I need to see some healthy self-respect in my heroines. Life is too short to read crap.
(Hey, I think I might send that in to our chapter quote contest for this year’s coffee mug. *grin*)
I have read books which have pushed me beyond my “comfort zone”. But if the writing is great, I don’t have a problem with it. If the subject matter pushes too hard, I put the book down.
I’ve been a reader for approx. 45 years. After all that time, haven’t I earned the right to not have warning labels on reading material as if I were incapable of handling the decision of “to read or not to read” for myself? If you need assurance that a book in question will not touch subject matter you can’t handle, use the internet. Google the author, book title, book review sites. There’s a ton of info available. Just don’t treat me like a child.
As far as the subject matter, whether to bar it from the genre altogether, that would be a shame. Write a great book, let the readers decide if they want to read it or not.
I wonder if there isn’t a niggling issue with image. The romance genre doesn’t garner respect and “Now we’re going backwards”. But “truth in labeling” won’t change a damn thing, nor baring subject matter, and quite frankly I think that makes the writers and readers look like idiots. My own opinion.
“does the concept of labeling seem more comfortable in a genre like Romance because there is a general tendency to see the books as primarily *commercial products* rather than as *creative works*?”
Novels in literary fiction get described as ‘challenging’, ‘thought-provoking’, ‘bleak’, ‘nihilistic’. There may be phrases used such as ‘disturbing insights into ….’ or ‘tackles a difficult subject’. Those are the equivalent sort of code-words which tell you that this is not the literary equivalent of Pride and Prejudice, and it’s a form of labelling that occurs in the blurbs, quotes and reviews of literary novels. Obviously I’m not talking about literal stickers/labels, but then, I wasn’t advocating big stickers with ‘rape’ on them for romances either.
just to clarify something i said on the other post- i’m not against “protecting” kids, i’m against people outside of my parents telling me what i can/cannot read.
I don’t want, as someone said (ok, i think they were joking), a letter R on the cover. But the the blurb, the cover, the BCC- yes, those do matter to me. The book in question actually does a pretty good job of letting people know there will be at least forced seduction. But my problem is with the books that don’t- like Laura’s example of Fallen Angel.
Again, how to talk to marketers.
As for this just being in romance, I don’t think it is. The cat murder series, the cooking series, they have cute covers because while the book is a mystery, it isn’t hard core. (i’m guessing from what people have told me about them; i haven’t read them yet). Sookie Stackhouse series (ok, i’m going back to romance) has cute covers, because while it does have paranormals and things of that nature, they seem to be more comedies. I haven’t read all of the Sookie books, but the ones I have read don’t have the same force other paranormals have.
Actually, I have a lot of problems with emotional abuse by the heros too.
I agree, Laura, that the hard-fought REPUTATION OF ROMANCE is part of what’s at stake in this debate, and in the debate over labels as well. A set of labels like those which one might find in fan fiction or erotica (mdom, light bd, rom) would suggest that readers were primarily reading to find those passages, rather than for the characters and the novel as a whole. Not that there’s anything wrong with that (as they say), but it’s not how many romance authors, readers, or even scholars see what they’re up to, and it plays into any numbers of deeply held prejudices against the genre.
As for CtC itself, I’m waiting for a library copy, although I feel a bit embarrassed about being the first reserve on the list. (”Oh, look! Here’s the man who wants to read the new romance with all the rape scenes.” Just how I’d like to be thought of….) The debates about it have, though, reminded me in passing of Sandra Tsing Loh’s review of the recent book “I’d Rather Eat Chocolate: Learning to Love My Low Libido,” by Joan Sewell.
Money quote (again, as they say):
“An informal survey among women of a certain age who don’t care anymore reveals the secret: Whatever is politically correct, you imagine its polar opposite, and that’s what’s hot. It’s not fantasizing that you’re Jodie Foster getting drooled over for your Oscar-winning acting — no. It’s fantasizing that you’re the victims Foster has played to get the Oscar, the waitress raped on a pinball machine by a bunch of mooks — yeah!
Or here’s another: You are a nineteen- year-old blonde, a slightly chunky and bored communications major with a defiantly unquenchable taste for amaretto sours. They are a passel of fiftysomething Kuwaiti businessmen (oil?) at some hideous downtown hotel with glass elevators. The oilmen offer money for a private party. Thirty dollars? No. Five hundred? Better. Two thousand seems about right. Five thousand is definitely too much (the high price being too call-girl-professional; proper licensing in the state of Nevada and vaginal health exams somehow become involved). At $5,000 the fantasy loses traction.
Regarding movie stars, again, political idealism, earnestness, and altruism have become drawbacks. I’ve never once had a fantasy involving Richard Gere and Tibet. Brad Pitt these days seems completely desexed, what with the close-cropped hair and the relentless pussy-whipping by Angelina Jolie. He is always trooping somewhere, saving Africa or something, hamstrung every which way by multiple Baby-Björns. Many women my age admit to feeling little for Ralph Fiennes now, or even back in The English Patient. Oh no. Only in Schindler’s List — some thirty pounds heavier, the fleshy Nazi captain, harassing young Jewish women in his basement. Hot!
Sewell is partial to Mel Gibson in Mad Max. But forget Young Mel. How about Old Mel, anti-Semitically ranting by the side of the highway, mad-dog-drunk on tequila, his career in ruins? We are Cop Lady, and Gibson is taking us right there in the squad car, oddly gleeful, pretending to flay us as in The Passion of the Christ. “Sugar Tits! Go! Fetch my coffee!” Hot hot hot!”
Now, I must confess: each of those squicks me, in multiple ways, and I’m trying to forget them all as quickly as I can. Her conclusion, though, stays with me:
“No wonder no one wants to talk much about real sex, dirty sex, hot sex — because the true nuts and bolts can’t be made to suit any forward-looking social agenda. Maybe, in this sense, female sexuality really is a culturally subversive little beastie. Not only do many women enjoy it best alone, but of their fantasies, perhaps the less said the better (in terms of humanity’s social progress). For women, though, the bizarre and the irregular might just be “normal.”
[Not, however, "romantic"?]
The full review is here: http://www.powells.com/review/2007_02_13.html.
Laura: I didn’t know that about the three deaths at all. Thanks for bringing it up.
roben: i like your quote. I’ll buy that mug.
“No wonder no one wants to talk much about real sex, dirty sex, hot sex — because the true nuts and bolts can’t be made to suit any forward-looking social agenda. Maybe, in this sense, female sexuality really is a culturally subversive little beastie. [...] For women, though, the bizarre and the irregular might just be “normal.”
Ah, this reminds me of the debate we had a while back at TMT about what’s ‘erotic’. Seems to me that people who tell women that that it’s ‘normal’ to have ‘bizarre’ and ‘irregular’ fantasies are being as normative as those who say it’s wrong to have such fantasies. Why does she think it’s wrong to condemn her fantasies but acceptable to go around telling people who, say, like ‘vanilla’ sex that what they’re having isn’t ‘real sex’? Can’t we just say that each woman (and man) is different, that each person will have different fantasies (some of which may, or may not, be ones they want to act out/which fit with their political/social ideology) and leave it at that?
Well, folks, I’ll tell you why the rapist hero is worse than the emotionally-battering hero:
I can give as good as I get when it comes to words.
I could not match his physical strength or overcome the surprise of the whole event.
In other words: one is a fair fight and the other isn’t.
For me, thank God, it wasn’t a chronic problem, although the son of a bitch was flabbergasted that I wouldn’t go out with him again.
Now, my bookcases are cleared, and it’s a great dissappointment to me, because I thought we had matured out of the hero-rapist. We’ve come a long way, baby? Some have.
Now, to clear out my browser bookmarks.
Oh, I know perfectly well I’m not evil. That epithet was hurled by another poster.
i second you, Laura. everyone has different fantasies. the end.
(and i’m with you eric, on the passages you quoted- and some you didn’t- ick)
I like rape romance. I’ll put that out there in print and mean it
Not as the norm of what I’ll read, but as that every once in a while decadent pleasure. I’ve read the book that is outraging so many and I really, really liked it, as well as the other one that many are upset about. So much that a few parts got a re-read and it’s going on my keeper shelf. I just wanted to put out my own feedback that I loved the ‘rape romance’ as a teenager and now in my late thirties find that it’s harder to find books like the RR that pull at my insides. Doesn’t mean *I* actually want to experience rape, but they’re like forbidden fruit fantasy to me. I remember this feeling I used to get in the pit of my stomach like, “Oh my God, he’s not going to… yes he did!” when it would happen and then looking forward to him redeeming himself.
Warning labels on books open up a slippery slope. Warning label for only rape? Or language? How strong of language? Deity cursing or F-word? What pushes your buttons may not push mine. my two cents
I wanted to post this last night but got side swiped by a terrible tummy bug and threw up all night. And now theres a new post but as Jenny has invited us to continue commenting here on the last blog - here goes.
Interestingly I’ve just realised that the book we’re all talking about is written by a colleague, a friend, of mine - doh! Obviously I haven’t read it yet. We live in the boonies down here and its not available in Oz yet.
She’ll be at the Oz conference in August Jenny so no doubt you’ll get to meet her and have a lot of interesting discussions on this topic. I would like to say this is a woman who had been trying to get published for 20, yes 20, years and after finalling in a gazillion contests both locally and in the US, finally cracked it. She’s warm and wonderful and would never, ever condone rape. She loves a laugh, a good G&T and makes a mean baked potato.
Now I’m even more pleased with myself for saying its all in the execution. Don’t judge a book by its cover, by a censor label or by the hype. Read it if you’re curious, don’t if you know it’s going to be a wallbanger but don’t judge it until you’ve read the damn thing. Seems to me a lot of people here have said ‘I don’t read books with xyz except there was this one book….’ As I say, it’s all in the execution.
Again I ask, why is it that literary books or crime books can go into gross detail about unspeakable acts but romance novels can’t? Aren’t we adults? Don’t we have the free will to stop reading if something offends us? The amount of hate mail this author has received has been shocking!!
The first Wilbur Smith novel I ever read (think I was 13) had a graphic torture scene that turned my stomach. I couldn’t read any further. Can’t, can’t do torture or senseless death, especially since becoming a mother. Still haven’t watched Braveheart or Troy because of this. Ten years later I picked up another one of his
(with great trepidation) - one of the Courtney series - and loved it.
Never say never I say.
Sookie Stackhouse series (ok, i’m going back to romance) has cute covers, because while it does have paranormals and things of that nature, they seem to be more comedies. I haven’t read all of the Sookie books, but the ones I have read don’t have the same force other paranormals have.
My love for the Sookie Stackhouse series is great, but I’ve always thought they had a very, very dark undercurrent. Lots of men who have the potential to do very bad things to women in those books, and the hint or threat of some sort of sexual or gender-based violence in each and every book in the series that I can recall. I guess it’s a reflection of Harris’s style, her understated wit and her incredible gentleness and insight as a storyteller, that a certain optimism always cuts the bittersweet. Oh, I could go on for decades about how under-rated I think Harris is as a craftsperson. Genius those Southern vampire books are, genius.
Robin: i’m going to have to read them again because i don’t really remember that. capable of violence- sure. but they seem so much lighter to me (of course, i think i was coming from Anne Bishop books at the time so anything and the sun could seem lighter). i thought there was violence but don’t remember thinking it was gender-based.
Sally J wrote: “Well, folks, I’ll tell you why the rapist hero is worse than the emotionally-battering hero:
I can give as good as I get when it comes to words.
I could not match his physical strength or overcome the surprise of the whole event.
In other words: one is a fair fight and the other isn’t.
For me, thank God, it wasn’t a chronic problem, although the son of a bitch was flabbergasted that I wouldn’t go out with him again.”
Sally J - good for you. At this point in my life, I can give as good as I get in words too. But consider the person who has low self-esteme to begin with. Might have had a troubled childhood. Been beaten down my words as a child. Or the abuser does it gradually. Starts of with a one negative comment, then another and then mabye a shove, then a push. Maybe it never gets violent. Maybe it’s just always words until the victim is stripped down to nothing. It happens. And in this case, it’s not a fair fight.
Verbal/emotional abuse is just as bad, but that is only my humble opinion.
Okay, playing catchup here.
I had to take this out of context to see how it felt to me. There was a movie adaptation of a popular dramedy/chick lit novel a few years back. Everyone talked about how great and funny the book was and all these great actress competed for roles in the movie. So I went to see it opening night.
Turns out this wasn’t the movie for me. It dealt with my “hot button” issue in a very dismissive way. There was a point, about halfway through, where if I could have managed to physically get up and leave the theatre, I would have RUN. (As it happened, I was too paralyzed by what I’d seen and trapped in the middle of a full to capacity screening room.)
Do I blame this movie or its reviewers for failing to warn me in advance that this movie would (to my mind) make light of a very serious issue? No. I am still traumatized by that one scene, replaying in my mind even as I write this comment, but I don’t blame the movie producers, the studio, the writer, the publisher, or the critics for failing to warn me. This is the price I paid for being part of a free society. Occassionally, what others say or do will unintentionally cause me/us pain. We can’t know everyone’s hot button issues. We can’t protect everyone without excluding someone.
Doesn’t mean that I don’t mention that particular movie and how I feel betrayed by how it treated that issue. Just means that I put the blame where it belongs - on my issue.
And Sally, at the risk of starting a flaming war, I don’t think you should dismiss emotional abuse so easily. Just because the injuries don’t land you in a hospital with broken bones doesn’t mean they aren’t there. You may think it is easy to fight back against words, but words are just as sinister as a physical threat and twice as insidious.
It can start with just a simple off-hand remark, like “That skirt isn’t ladylike.” And then it builds until that abuser’s world view is your ONLY view of the world. You’re stuck in a world of gray; not by your choice, but because to be otherwise would mean that you must not be a lady, or worthy, or deserve a place in this world.
Emotional abuse can be as powerful as a physical beating, you just can’t see the bruises.
Cary wrote: “Emotional abuse can be as powerful as a physical beating, you just can’t see the bruises.” Absolutely. And that is why the damage is often more devastating and harder to recover from. IMO.
Re: Covers. I think most of them get it right, or close enough to right, that most readers are not completely shocked by what is inside. I know I rarely am. Obviously, there are occasional glaring exceptions.
On the previous post, in response to my comment that I am an intelligent adult capable of putting down a book I find offensive, Laura V wrote:
“As I read them, the implication of comments like those seems to be that those of us who want a bit of a warning about the contents so that we can avoid reading them are somehow not full adults, or not ‘intelligent adults’ or or are not taking adult responsibility for ourselves. I doubt anyone intended the comments to be taken that way, ../cut/.. Everyone has their boundaries for risks they are and are not prepared to take, and hinting that some of us are not ‘big girls’ because our tolerance levels are lower than others on this particular issue is not particularly fair.”
Laura, I have a huge amount of respect for your intelligence and thoughtful reasoning, but this made me so angry, as did your subsequent comment about depressive types, of which you claim to be one, who are “probably more helped by cheerful, upbeat reading which counteracts our innate pessimism and realistic view of the world.”
First of all, I am a writer as well as a reader. I assume my audience is more similar to me than dissimilar. That is, I assume they are intelligent adults who, if they are offended by something they read, will put it down unfinished. My comment in that regard was not in any way intended to insult readers or their intelligence or their ability to make choices for themselves. Quite the opposite.
The point I was trying to make is that I do not want someone else making value judgments and deciding for me what is offensive. I want to read the book and decide for myself. As Najida said: “And often, my trigger is your turn-on.” And vice versa.
I also consider myself to be a “depressive type,” god help me. I read across so many genres you probably would not believe me if I told you everything I’ve read in the past month. I read different things depending on my mood and, frankly, my energy level. Not all of it is “cheerful, upbeat reading” and I think you’re making huge, perhaps erroneous, assumptions about the reading preferences of “depressive types.”
Some books I read because I don’t want to think. Some I read because I respect the author’s skill or because they write in my genre and I want to dissect it. Some I read because I know they will force me to think. Some I read without any expectation other than new discovery, even if that is disappointing. And some I read because I know I will get sucked in and not notice the craft and I will enjoy the ride, though those are so rare lately.
I think this is where I differ from many of you on this. I don’t think there is anything wrong with a book that upsets readers. I don’t think it should be anyone’s stated goal to avoid upsetting readers. Now, I’m not talking about traumatizing them, no one wants that, but some readers have such sensitive buttons that avoiding doing so might, in some cases, be impossible. I’m talking about upsetting in a way that makes you think about things that are uncomfortable, or feel things more deeply than you’ve felt them before, or prompt you to argue with a friend or co-worker about something you’ve never discussed before. Why is that a bad thing? I’d be delighted if I book I wrote did those things.
I don’t want to read, or write, a book that carries a label saying: “The book you are currently holding is just like the last 30 books you read. It is inoffensive and politically correct and will not push any of your hot buttons no matter what they are. You will read it and be so happy, happy, happy. Butterflies will sing and colors will dance. There is no conflict and you will not be required to think deep thoughts or feel strong emotions. There is no unhappiness or sorrow or rage in this story. No one is hurt, physically or emotionally, nor is anyone inconvenienced in any way. The H/H have a minor misunderstanding on page five but, don’t worry, it is quickly and easily resolved. You will be so pleased to know this author has three more books just like this scheduled for publication in coming months.”
When that day comes, I will stop reading. And stop writing.
I’d apologize for the length of this comment, except that I’m sitting here feeling rather ornery and perverse and I’m hoping that maybe my long-windedness just upset someone.
And for those of you keeping track, it’s 8:45 pm EST. And I haven’t eaten dinner.
Okay, I spent the whole drive home stewing about this. (Jenny, you can send your bill to United Behavioral Health, Indianapolis, IA.)
I’m not off-topic, because Jenny herself brought it up. Why does emotional abuse make her sqwickey?
Because Jenny, as a romance writer, you not only know, but embrace the knowledge that love is the one thing no one can live without. From the love of a parent, to the love of a spouse, or the warm, rough, wet kiss of a doggie, we can’t live without it. Children who are unable to bond with a parent in their earliest days often develop severe emotional issues in later life, up to and including sociopathic behaviors.
The emotional abuser uses our own need for love as a weapon against us. This is irreconcilable to the
message of a romance novel.
The emotionally abusive parent is telling us that unless we conform to their view, accept our lives in their prison, we are not worthy of their love and attention. If we challenge that initial, “That skirt looks trashy”, we risk losing their respect and love, the only affection due us from the world.
Fight back? Impossible, unless we reject love itself. And we can only do that when we find a greater love, one more true to us.
OK, here’s my deal, throw tomatos if you must. It is a genre thing for me. When I walk down the romance aisle of my bookstore, I really think I’d want some type of indicator that there is a rape, a real(albeit fictionalized)rape, in the love story. Yes, I am a Pollyanna about this. In regular shelved fiction I am upset/effected by a rape in the story, in romance I am shocked and offended, because it would be so counter-intuitive to the why of the purchase.
Have you all heard the story about the frogs? Here it is anyway. If a frog is thrown into a pot of boiling water, he’ll do his best to jump out and save himself. Instead, if a frog is put into a pot of cold water, he’ll stay. Then the heat is added. He’ll stay. He’ll stay even when the water is so hot that it’s cooking him. This is a version of emotional abuse.
Emotional abuse is terribly hard to define, even for the abusee. A bit at a time, calorie of heat by calorie. The abusee deals with it a calorie at a time, perhaps over years, and doesn’t understand it to be what it is. But she still gets cooked. A rape? She knows she’s in boiling water and does her best to get out of it. Rape is evil. Abuse is evil.
I’ve been re-reading some of the earlier comments (and BCB’s above) re: depressives. As a certified depressive, I can say that yes, sometimes I do seek out happy, cozy reading to counter my mood. But just as often, I seek out the “dark”. I believe BCB mentioned Karin Slaughter in an earlier comment. She is an example of an author that is most definitely not for everyone. There are a lot of very disturbing things happening in her books. But sometimes, I “need” to read about that. Sometimes, as a depressive, you become so numb to your own feelings that you need the vicarious hit of someone else’s pain. So, please, don’t lump all depressives in the “Must Read Happy Books” category. (I think if there is one thing all of this blog’s readers can agree on, generalities are BAD.)
As to “labeling”, I’m just not up for that. I just keep thinking of the mockery that is the MPAA (G, PG, PG-13, R, etc.). The labels tell us nothing about the content. I remember an interview with George Clooney some years ago, about the R-rating assigned to his remake of “Solaris”, due to a scene of him dancing naked with his co-star. The studio was quite upset, since they saw the rating as potentially limiting to the audience. Clooney, however, said that he didn’t mind the R-rating, since he felt the greater themes of the movie were more adult in nature. (And having seen the movie, I would agree. It wasn’t fare for casual teenage movie-going.
I think the better movement would be a call for more accurate back-copy and cover design. Don’t let marketing run the book; slapping a chick-lit cover on a dark murder mystery because they think it will sell better that way.
I also think we should be saavy consumers. If you’re unsure of a new author, don’t buy it on first release. Check it out from the library, read a few reviews before you pick it up, ask a bookseller for help.
And GP, my shrink brings up the frog story repeatedly.
Robin wrote:
“It might help if we could actually decide on what we see as at stake here: is it the freedom of authors, the integrity of the genre, the agency of readers, the freest exercise of choice by all, truth in advertising, the relationship between books and readers? Whatever we privilege will shape the terms of the discussion and any potential solutions.”
That’s one of things I really find fascinating about this. All I asked was, “Should rape be banned from romance?” But we’ve got all of this STUFF here that’s amazing, making me examine things I’d never thought of before, like why I can read a rape in a historical like To Have and To Hold or read the scene in Devil’s Cub where Vidal menaces Mary, and think, “Fabulous book,” but if you took those exact same scenes and made them contemporary, I don’t give a damn how good the writing is, I’m outraged. And that’s hypocritical of me. And yet. . .
Laura wrote:
“I have the sense that the romance writing community went through a period of soul-searching about this topic after three romance authors were murdered by their abusive husbands in the period from 1996-1999. It’s certainly the impression I got from reading this 1999 article in Salon.”
That really rocked the community and made us all look at the controlling hero. But the controlling hero was never about reality, and whatever short term correction there was, the fantasy remains solid.
Eric wrote:
“A set of labels like those which one might find in fan fiction or erotica (mdom, light bd, rom) would suggest that readers were primarily reading to find those passages,”
You know, is it maybe because erotica is about sex, whereas the rest of subgenres are about other things–suspense, whatever–with a lot of sex? If you’re reading for a particular fantasy, it makes sense to mark books in that genre by that fantasy, the way the rest of romance is marked comedy, inspirationsl suspense by the cover copy and art. Maybe.
I disagree that the victim of emotional abuse can always fight back. If you’re a strong, verbal person with a good sense of self, then you’re not going to get into that situation. But if you’re not sure of who you are, if you’ve been emotionally abused all your life, then you think that’s normal and you can’t walk away because the whole world is like that. And emotional abuse does not stop. Ever. It’s constant, you can’t escape it, unless you can finally understand that the world view the abuser is surrounding you with is false. And you need help to see that, and sometimes you never do. It’s why I have such a hard time with those Rochester/Heathcliff heroes. They’re all about control and domination, which is great as a fantasy and beyond horrible in real life. And all of what Cary said.
You know, the dark covers and the cover copy about force could just have easily been about emotional abuse as rape. Perhaps that’s why the dark covers and the language of dominance and force on the back covers aren’t enough; it’s not that the readers weren’t warned the romance was going to be dark, they were expecting emotional abuse. What they weren’t expecting was physical abuse. Maybe?
Obviously I’m not talking about literal stickers/labels, but then, I wasn’t advocating big stickers with ‘rape’ on them for romances either.
No, but some readers are, at least those that aren’t campaigning for complete ouster of certain controversial material.
I agree that the cover and the blurb for that Thornton novel are misleading, and personally, I think this could all be settled by thoughtful blurbs and covers that weren’t so clearly deceptive. If books were packaged with the candor of CtC, I don’t think this would be as much of an issue, because that blurb is, IMO, clear enough to warn the reader of dark themes, but general enough not to flatten the nuances or spoil the plot.
To do anymore would, IMO, threaten to dumb the genre down, because we either wind up with a movie-type rating system that’s based on what’s appropriate for those who don’t have the legal capacity to choose for themselves, or a system like Ellora’s Cave, which, as Eric pointed out, looks more like a browsing system for particular elements, which IMO would bring its own type of disaster to mainstream Romance. Why?
If the Romance community put half as much energy into talking about thoughtful writing, masterful craftsmanship, and the various pleasures of reading passionate and beautifully written love stories, I’d be a peppy puppy. I wonder whether it’s any coincidence that some of the people who are recognized as master craftspeople of Romance are also envelope pushers at some level. Not that everything has to be risky and edgy and avant-garde; some of my favorite Romance novels are gentle and lovely and beautifully crafted as such. But it still irks me that we spend so much attention on content, on these questions of what’s *good* for women, AS WOMEN (and I’m not saying you’re doing this, just that CtC has brought up those lines of argument). Certainly nothing in this genre is ideologically neutral, but one of the things that frustrates me most about Romance is that the integrity of writing as an art and a craft seems to ride not just in the backseat but in the trunk, shoved underneath the spare tire and the jack, forgotten until the car breaks down and all the stuff back there suddenly becomes useful.
That’s why I’d love to see a way in which the marketing aspect of the book — the cover and the blurb — take on any burden we might want of helping a reader self-select. Beyond that, IMO, anything that compromises the already somewhat impaired function of artistic integrity in Romance is going to negatively impact both those gentle Romances and the edgy ones, because even the gentlest, loveliest Romance can be controversial, because by its very nature, passion is dramatic and sometimes even extreme.
Jenny wrote: “Perhaps that’s why the dark covers and the language of dominance and force on the back covers aren’t enough; it’s not that the readers weren’t warned the romance was going to be dark, they were expecting emotional abuse. What they weren’t expecting was physical abuse. Maybe?”
Given other comments you’ve made, I’m not sure this is what you intended to convey here, but it seems you just implied that physical abuse is so much worse. Or that society perceives it to be so much more offensive. Or less acceptable. And maybe as writers we need to consider to what extent we are responsible for perpetuating that.
You know, the dark covers and the cover copy about force could just have easily been about emotional abuse as rape. Perhaps that’s why the dark covers and the language of dominance and force on the back covers aren’t enough; it’s not that the readers weren’t warned the romance was going to be dark, they were expecting emotional abuse. What they weren’t expecting was physical abuse. Maybe?
Did anyone who was outraged by CtC even read the blurb? Because seriously, it says forced seduction to me at the very least.
Re. emotional abuse, here’s my theory and it’s not pretty: I think that so many women in RL put up with *some* version of emotional neglect and abuse, whether it’s being disrespected and unappreciated by their kids, or putting up with a crappy salary rather than asking for more, or staying married to a self-involved spouse who takes his wife for granted, or whatever, that they barely even notice it in fiction. OR if they notice it, the negative consequences are sublimated or suppressed somehow. In other words, it’s *too close* to RL in a lot of instances, even if it’s so much more extreme than what many readers tolerate in their own lives. But I really know very few women — strong, independent, intelligent, self-affirming women — who don’t put up with much more than they know they deserve or believe intellectually that they should have to.
Orangehands: remember why Sookie’s cousin Hadley was killed? And was it Sookie’s friend Tara who was being abused by her vampire lover? And wasn’t he the one who broke into Sookie’s house and threatened to rape her? And then there was the murder of the gay bartender in the first book, and IIRC one of the recent books featured Sookie being snatched by some guys who threatened to rape her, as well, maybe when she was scoping out a house? Harris has talked publicly about being a rape survivor, and her book A Secret Rage is very harrowing, even though it’s fiction. And isn’t Lily Bard a rape survivor? I’ve always appreciated that Harris includes these details in the Sookie books, because it’s a reminder that the flip side of that erotic paranormal passion is a different type of darkness and violence. IMO it’s part of the “normal” aspect of the paranormal.
My answer: accurate and honest blurbs, accurate and honest covers. The writers should have a strong say in OK’ing the blurbs and covers, and communication with the writers/artists (maybe not veto power, because I’m sure some writers are short-sighted about these marketing things, but definitely a voice in the decision). I think this would take care of 90 percent of the problems. As many people have mentioned, the cover and blurb gave strong clues to the would-be reader.
Readers who have a sensitive squick-o-meter should either take the responsibility to read reviews OR acknowlege that un-vetted books are a gamble of their money, time and mental health.
I don’t want any more specific warning labels, because I’m afraid it might turn me off of a really good book. I mean, if you look at my favorite authors, all of them deal with definitely squicky subject. Jenny has stalking, murder and at least one rape fantasy scene in her books. Lois McMaster Bujold — oh, goodness, where do I start? Great, great books, but if you think about it, you’ve got jack-booted dictators, psychopaths, homosexuality, bisexuality and sex-change in order to inherit her brother’s title. All handled with a light touch and great humanity, but it’s still there. Terry Pratchett — Hogfather ain’t really for kiddies, folks.
In the wrong hands, dark issues are cudgels; in the right hands, they lead you to enlightenment and greater understanding. I liked the suggestion that they should put a “Classic in the Making!” warning labels on books instead of constricting the imagination.
Eric, loved the Loh essay. Thanks for posting a link. Although, suddenly I’m having trouble breathing for thinking of Richard Gere in Tibet. He could come into my yurt anytime.
Oh, I think many readers definitely consider emotional abuse to be less than physical abuse. I think that’s why the “alpha hero” who is actually a pretty great guy degenerated into the abusive hero. Because so many people want the dominance fantasy but can’t go with physical abuse. I think there’s an assumption that constant criticism is not abuse. This is sliding a little to the right here, but look at the abuse Britney Spears has taken over the past year, and it’s excused as all right because she’s a celebrity and evidently has an IQ of 12, so magazines and blogs can say anything they want about her. It’s abusive, which is what Craig Ferguson said in that great monologue he did. You have an entire nation abusing a very young woman for sport, and damn few people are recognizing it because women are used to being verbally abused. I can’t tell you how many women-bashing jokes I’ve been told because I have a sense of humor and I’ll “get” it. If I don’t think demeaning jokes about my gender are funny, then I don’t have a sense of humor. Andrew Dice Clay used to have a lot of women in his audiences laughing at some horrific anti-female jokes. But he never hit anybody in the audience, so he never crossed the line.
My point, and I do have one somewhere in there, is that the dominance fantasy is a strong one (I’d vote for it) but that it has to be coded in a way that’s acceptable for it to work for a reader. And I think it’s easier in our society for a woman to code it in verbal abuse which she’s used to than it is in physical abuse which is not the norm and societally unacceptable. Think of all those horrible self-help books, Ten Stupid Things Women Do and their like. Buying that book is saying, “Hey, tell me how stupid I am.” And it sold like crazy.
I’m just thinking that the emotional and verbal abuse in romance novels may be more dangerous than the rape in romance novels. I’m thinking there are damn few women who’ll read a romance and think, “Yeah, rape, that sounds about right,” but there are probably a lot of them who read the controlling verbal abuser as reinforcement to the false reality they’re living in.
But I don’t see anybody saying, “Put verbal abuse on the cover so I know.”
Which is good. Anti-lableling here. I’m just saying’ . . .
“I’m just thinking that the emotional and verbal abuse may be more dangerous than the rape.”
I agree with you. As readers, as writers, what can we or should we do about that? Surely the answer is not to stick a label on something and say, don’t read this, it might offend you.
Oh, may I rant just a little more about inaccurate covers? When I could get to bookstores, I would buy books by the cover. You could just tell which ones were the humorous fantasies, and which ones were the dystopias. The back-of-the-book blurb helped, too, of course. But I would feel so *betrayed* when I got to the linch-pin scene, and find it felt nothing like the cover of the book. If the book was good, I’d forgive, but still think bad thoughts about the publisher. If the book was bad, I’d start to avoid other books by that publisher.
Artwork should be attractive and lure the buyer in, but if lies to the reader, it’s going to backfire on the publisher. Same goes for blurbs.
Oh, and I wanted to say, if the content is really pushing the envelopes, publishers already put a warning on the frontispiece or add a foreword. Isn’t this system enough?
As for going back to the bad-old-days of rape fantasy dominating the genre — I think you must trust the readership. There will still be room for *good* non-rape fantasy romances. The mediocre non-trendy stuff is always edged out. And let’s face it — a lot of mediocre rape fantasy romances is going to swing the pendulum back to different conflicts much faster than the current controversy will.
LOL! So why do you get to edit your comments and we don’t?
I just thought of something. We are now a more educated society than we were 30 years ago. The ‘romance’ of the man overcome with passion to ‘have his way’ has been replaced with indepth interviews made for TV with serial rapists and killers.
We no longer see them as the ravisher, but as sociopath that can’t be fixed. As a misogynist with mother issues. As cruel, as evil…. you name it. It’s hard to read a book with this in it and not think “OK, so he needs Geodon with a Thorazine back!”
As for physical versus emotional—-both are bad. But
in the midst of all emotional and spiritual abuse, I’ve known I would survive and could walk out later. I just watched the hands of the clock.
Physcial? You don’t know if you’ll live to see another tick of the clock.
Also, from a purely psychobabble POV. Someone with rotten people skills who’s emotionally abusive does have a glimmer of hope in therapy etc. Less so for the physical abuser.
Because it’s my blog.
Hell, yes, I edit my comments. It’s damn hard typing in these little boxes.
I know that’s not fair. But usually it’s just typos or clarifications. In the last post I’d written,”I’m just thinking that the emotional and verbal abuse may be more dangerous than the rape,” and then realized that could be taken out of context as meaning that I thought verbal abuse was more dangerous than rape in reality, so I went back and put in “romance novels.” You’re BCB, you can duck if you screw up; my butt is on the line here every time I post.
Which, you will notice, does not keep me from shooting off my mouth. I just fix the screw-ups.
I’m just thinking that the emotional and verbal abuse in romance novels may be more dangerous than the rape in romance novels.
I tend to recoil from the concept of “danger,” if only because the human psyche is an amazing thing, and who knows how we’re all working this out at some deeper level. Also, I’d hate to see Romance ever in danger of being shelved in the self-help section. I was cracking up all the way through Stuart’s Ice Blue when Summer kept asking herself what she was doing. Damn, I thought, at least she’s aware that she’s crazy — bonus points for her!
I think that what hurts Romance most as a genre is the mindless repetition of certain characters, motifs, plotlines, and tropes, many of them so familiar they’re practically written in shorthand for the reader to flesh out in his or her own mind (which IMO forces the reader to take on some of the burden of craft, which I see as unfair, but different discussion). It’s not even so much the repetition but the unquestioning use of certain devices because they’re familiar to the genre. Although I’ll embrace that because it’s part of any genre as large as Romance, and I know there are plenty of authors who *aren’t* doing that. Which is why I was so impressed with Campbell’s book, by the way. I will generally follow a thoughtful author most anywhere, because I can sense her respect for her work, which seduces me every time and with very little force.
So should I apologize for quoting you before you could fix it? Or should I just duck? Because honestly, I’m not sure I know how to do that.
And my butt is on the line, too, it’s just not as b– no, wait, that doesn’t sound right. My reputation is important to me, too. How’s that?
Nope. Quote what you read, it’s all you can do.
You know, we do work on our craft. All of us, RWA is a craft-teaching machine. But readers will go for a badly crafted book full of honest emotion before they’ll go for a well-crafted book that has no depth because they’re there for the ride not the craft. So the genre rewards emotion over craft, as opposed to say literary fiction that I think rewards craft and language over emotion. Doesn’t mean all romance fiction is badly crafted or that all lit fiction is cold, just that that’s what the readers/marketplace rewards.
The repetition is part of genre in general, I think. I get really sick of those coming of age literary stories. I’ve had about all the cosy mysteries I can take. But when I need a comfort read, I go back and read Pyramids or Feet of Clay because I love the Discworld. I think the repetition of tropes is one of the reasons women read so much romance. Not the reason they read romance, but the reason they buy so much. It’s like a sonnet. I want to read a sonnet, I want that rhythm and length, but I don’t want them all exactly alike. So the tension comes in the same but different and sometimes people err on the side of the same (which I think is what you’re talking about, Robin) and sometimes they go a lot farther into different than the majority can comfortably handle, which may be what Campbell did. If I have to choose a side, I’m going for too far into different, but not everybody feels that way. And it’s probably not the side to choose if you’re interested in sales. I get angry mail every time I write a book because it’s not like the last one I wrote. “I loved your last book and this one was awful, what happened to the dogs?” All the genres reward uniformity, even lit fiction. And Campbell definitely did not fit the uniform, which makes me on her side even though I still have not read the book.
First of all, I would like to personally apologize to you, Sally. It was not my intent or purpose or thought to offend you in any way. You: good thoughtful comments. Clones: evil warpness taken to unrealistic extreme. But obviously my intent was badly mistaken, so I’m very sorry.
I agree that this conversation has obviously hit a lot of triggers for many people. Personally it’s hit a few triggers. One, my love for books. Let me rephrase: my absolute adoration for books, to the point I find it difficult to throw away a damaged book. The worst moment for me in ANY movie EVER is The Name of the Rose, when the library burns. I get nauseous thinking about that all that knowledge lost. That and my library background makes me instinctually say NO!!! whenever someone even suggests any kind of restriction of books. I’m not even a fan of movie ratings. I do agree, though, that buyers should have a good understanding of what they are buying (or seeing), so a good description of the material on the back cover is essential. While I personally have never heard of the Fallen Angel, I own the other books mentioned, so I actually sat down and read the description. And honestly, most of them match up fairly well. The Eve books has a lot of words like dark and dangerous passion and one has a quote of: “A man can do a great deal of damage to a woman…” So, no, not a walk in the park. I know you, Jenny, have said a few times you thought Anyone But You was misleading, at least with the cover art, but the description holds up well. Yes, it says that Dr. Oreo (forgot his name) is younger and sexy, and yes the novel is sexy, but in a fun kind of way. The sex scenes are intense, but in a fun way, not a dark creepy way. And that was great. The only books that didn’t really allude all that well to the darkness that the characters go through is the Black Jewels books, but those are published under Fantasy not Romance, so HEA is not a requirement going in. (Side comment: great HEA, but when you realize the hero is called the Sadist, although never with or to the heroine, you have to figure there’s going to be some dark freaky stuff on the way to the HEA.) If any of those darker books had sounded all light and happy, I would be furious. Just as I’m furious when I go the movies expecting one thing from the previews and get a completely different movie. ARGH!! I will suggest this: I have never had a problem with returning a book, at least to Borders. I just nicely but emphatically say the book was terrible, and I get my money back. I also don’t break the spines when I read, so that helps a lot.
I do have an OT comment for those who made comments about protecting daughters until they are a certain age. I would never ever ever tell anyone how to raise kids. But I have a thought to consider. My mother thought that she could protect me best by almost overexposing me to “inappropriate” material (overcompensating for some nasty issues with her own childhood.) I knew about the birds and the bees way before I knew my letters. I am grateful for that knowledge, because she died when I was young and I ended up in a ….. bad situation. (She was a single mom with no close family. My options were limited.) With that knowledge I knew that THOSE kind of hugs were not friendly hugs, and that THOSE kind of hugs led to sex. No matter what kind of manipulation or emotional crap they came up with, I knew what I knew, and I was able to navigate 10 years of that situation … I won’t say unscathed, but I don’t have the horror stories that the other kids in the house who grew up in that house have. So those of you who are parents: you have to make the best choice for you and your family. If you have a large extended, stable family out there that can take care of your kids in case of the unthinkable, then you have some luxuries. If you don’t have that network and you have kids…… your choice is your own, but I’m damn thankful my mother made her choice to protect with as much knowledge as possible.
And yeah, there’s my other trigger in this whole situation. I would much prefer to read about someone physically broken than emotionally broken. Bones heal fairly quick.
And on that godawful note, I’m going to go read a very lighthearted book and then go to bed. I’ll read the comments made while I was typing this later (since I’ve just noticed Jenny’s up there).
11:30 pm EDT.
Wistfully, Mary asked Um, Jenny? Could you fix any typos I make too?
Oh. Oh well. It was worth a try.
Don’t really have a comment aside from that, too busy listening to all of you.
BCB: your butt is pretty b- uh-hem. never mind.
Robin: i only read a few Sookies, out of order. and never any Bard. i did read one Harper Connelly but the only thing i remember about that is thinking it’s so cool to have a character read all the time…but damn is it boring. (i really must give her another chance).
I think where i’m differentiating from a lot of people is that I’m not looking so much at rape scenes inside a story (romance or other), where a character is raped/abused, but at the books that have rape being part of the H/H love story, where one H (hero or heroine) rapes the other and there still on the jouney to HEA. So I’m really on the slippery rope. (Be quiet about my butt swinging, BCB). I actually think for the most part I’m able to avoid them using blurbs/covers (I don’t really read reviews). It’s the books that come out of left field for me that have me going- where’s the warning? I’m also finding I’m not as tolerant as I once was for books- badly written, with things I don’t like, etc.
GP: love the analogy. (besides therapy, I’ve also heard it in relation to global warming)
Emotional abuse is horrible. I use the word insidious for it. I watch for it in books, TV, movies, etc- but I don’t always catch it. Sometimes it’s so small I wonder if I’m making a mountian out of a molehill- oh sure, he says some bad stuff, but who doesn’t about people? When does the line between teasing and being damaging get crossed? Extremes are easier to spot; but the middle-ones get brushed off or casually dismissed or not even noticed. I’ll read a book and love it, think the characters where smart and funny and kind and not abusive at all, and then I’ll fine-comb it or talk with people and discover all these things that do make me pause. For the labeling of emotional abuse, it’s probably quicker to label those that don’t have it.
yeah Jenny, i liked those dogs. bring them back. oh wait, the sisters book has rabbits, it’s cool.
heather: i clutched at that scene too. omibob, all those books, gone…geez, talk about a scene worth crying over.
my mom gave me knowledge way early too, and while i tease her sometimes about it, i’m very grateful. i didn’t have to go through what you did (and i’m so sorry), but it helped me, and it helped friends of mine.
which is OT so i’ll go bother my roomie for a tiny bit.
I want to read a sonnet, I want that rhythm and length, but I don’t want them all exactly alike. So the tension comes in the same but different and sometimes people err on the side of the same (which I think is what you’re talking about, Robin) and sometimes they go a lot farther into different than the majority can comfortably handle, which may be what Campbell did. If I have to choose a side, I’m going for too far into different, but not everybody feels that way.
Yes that’s what I meant, and your comment on Campbell’s book helps me make sense of some of the reactions. And it’s too bad, IMO, because if people could back off the emotion, I think it would be easier to see that Campbell’s book explicitly condemns rape. Which may not satisfy all the critics but at least it would be fair treatment for an intelligent author.
Heather: a thoughtful and important post.
*raises hand* I have an idea. All rape romances will have a Mantitty Cover with the hero wearing a full black cape and mask, with the cape artfully flaring over the lower half of his face. Alla, Zorro.
There you go. Problem solved. United Nations, here I come. *g*
Ok, serioulsy. I find physical abuse and mental abuse much more devastating in stories. I cannot stand a mentally abusive hero. If the heroine stands up to him, makes him stop and he grovels and takes classes, it may make me tolerate him, but I still don’t like the way it perpetuates the Alpha=A** thinking. I love redemption stories, and if that’s what I get, than I’m Ok for people having temporary assholitis. We all make mistakes, but in no way do I want to see it glorified, or accepted by the heroine. Romance is about how people change and grow to love one another, not how the hero subjugates the heroine and makes her into a submissive puddle of goo.
One of the lines that was quoted in the Salon article where the heroine’s mother tells her a man will come along and take care of her and cosset her? *squick* Man, if I told my daughter that -I don’t even want to think about it.
Najida said “As for physical versus emotional—-both are bad. But in the midst of all emotional and spiritual abuse, I’ve known I would survive and could walk out later. I just watched the hands of the clock.
Physcial? You don’t know if you’ll live to see another tick of the clock….
Emotional abuse destroys too. True emotional abuse can bring you to the point where you believe you aren’t worthy, and that is the point where self-harm becomes a dangerous wish.
Najida again: “…Also, from a purely psychobabble POV. Someone with rotten people skills who’s emotionally abusive does have a glimmer of hope in therapy etc. Less so for the physical abuser.”
Not really; just as with physical abuse, emotional abuse is a cycle that perpetuates itself. It lives on in its victims - they survive the emotionally abusive childhood, by adhering doggedly to the views and restrictions imposed on them by the abuser. When the victim themselves become a spouse or a parent, they know no other way to be.
Just as many physical abusers display an underlying addiction to drugs or alcohol, and use the threat of violence to build their illusion of control, emotional abusers use the threat of love.
The emotional abuser is no easier to “cure” than a physical abuser. And since so few people recognize the danger they represent, they are even less likely to receive treatment.