The romance genre is defined by two aspects that can be found in every romance book or novel:
a central love story between characters
an emotionally satisfying, happy ending
Because of this, dozens of Romance novelists claim they don't write Romance novels.
Come on, I say.
It's not some dusty definition that decides what you write, it's what the readers get out of it. If romance is the central, essential part of the story; if the readers focus on the relationship; if the book can be summarized as a "love story", then it is Romance, whatever the "official definition" is.
Wuthering Heights is a love story. Twilight is a love story.
Gone With the Wind is not. Why? The love story is not essential for the story. It's all about Scarlett. Her loves and marriages are just sidenotes, even Ashley and Rhett.
Outlander is a Romance novel. Nicholas Sparks writes Romance novels. Sorry, guys, but why do you hate being called Romance novelists, when the Romance genre has made you rich and happy?
Every other genre of literature has evolved, expanded, diversified, transmutated, grown, but not Romance. If you believe the Romance writers. Who don't write Romance. For some weird reason.
Seriously, how do you even define a "happy ending" nowadays? HEA? Catherine and Heathcliff got each other and it's a very emotionally satisfying ending to the novel. Sure, not the traditional "they married and lived happily ever after", because they never married and they died. But does that make it any less emotionally satisfying? If it wasn't an emotionally satisfying love story, then why are Cathy and Heath mentioned in many lists of the most romantic couples? Yes, it was dysfunctional as F, so what? Life usually is. (Not THAT dysfunctional, but still :-D)
https://www.shereadsromancebooks.com/romance-genre-and-romance-tropes-guide/
BTW "own voices" is not a subgenre of anything. It's 100% about the authors. They can write any subgenre of Romance, and they do.
No comments:
Post a Comment