Love to have you or both of you guest author about a topic related to your blog. Perhaps commenting on how to align the reading of bodice rippers of the past to a more politically correct audience of today. Every time I read an article about this trope should die, put out of existence, etc., I scream no, because they often contain the tropes I enjoy. Different tropes for different folks is my mantra.
My co-reviewer at our blog (we discuss retro romance) is male. We're 45 & 50 and have read romance since our teens. Old-school reads are our thing, as we love the cinematic, epic plots of yore. More Westerns and Medievals than Regencies and Victorians.
I get a kick out of "non PC" bodice rippers that are dark and subversive, however my partner has zero tolerance for cruel heroes, captor-captive or women in peril plots and rape tropes. He prefers more authentic relationships and appreciates a gripping love story.
I know a few other men who read romance, and while their tastes differ a bit, the common thread is that men--as you stated so succinctly--want an exciting and engaging story & deep emotional connection to characters who make strong partners for each other.
One thing to note is that males have garnered much success writing romantic fiction--so long as it's steeped in tragedy. Authors such as Erich Segal, Robert James Waller and Nicholas Sparks have sold millions of novels writing about doomed love stories. Tragedy equals gravitas, so there's no shame in that.
However, the happy, optimistic endings that are required in the modern romance genre are regarded as mere women's fiction and chick-lit. Or worse: mommy porn. So there's a stigma to being open about reading romance.
As I said, I'm a lover of campy bodice rippers, but those clinch covers I adore no doubt put off prospective readers. The Kindle has enabled folks to keep their reading private, so it's not surprising that more men are reading romance.
Thank you for the kind words. Loved your website and thankful to know about it.
Check it out, peeps: https://sweetsavageflame.com
Love to have you or both of you guest author about a topic related to your blog. Perhaps commenting on how to align the reading of bodice rippers of the past to a more politically correct audience of today. Every time I read an article about this trope should die, put out of existence, etc., I scream no, because they often contain the tropes I enjoy. Different tropes for different folks is my mantra.
My co-reviewer at our blog (we discuss retro romance) is male. We're 45 & 50 and have read romance since our teens. Old-school reads are our thing, as we love the cinematic, epic plots of yore. More Westerns and Medievals than Regencies and Victorians.
I get a kick out of "non PC" bodice rippers that are dark and subversive, however my partner has zero tolerance for cruel heroes, captor-captive or women in peril plots and rape tropes. He prefers more authentic relationships and appreciates a gripping love story.
I know a few other men who read romance, and while their tastes differ a bit, the common thread is that men--as you stated so succinctly--want an exciting and engaging story & deep emotional connection to characters who make strong partners for each other.
One thing to note is that males have garnered much success writing romantic fiction--so long as it's steeped in tragedy. Authors such as Erich Segal, Robert James Waller and Nicholas Sparks have sold millions of novels writing about doomed love stories. Tragedy equals gravitas, so there's no shame in that.
However, the happy, optimistic endings that are required in the modern romance genre are regarded as mere women's fiction and chick-lit. Or worse: mommy porn. So there's a stigma to being open about reading romance.
As I said, I'm a lover of campy bodice rippers, but those clinch covers I adore no doubt put off prospective readers. The Kindle has enabled folks to keep their reading private, so it's not surprising that more men are reading romance.
Fantastic article.
Jacqueline Diaz
sweetsavageflame.com