tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post115202752808829288..comments2024-03-26T01:10:13.720+00:00Comments on Teach Me Tonight: Musings on Reviews and Establishing a Canon of RomancesE. M. Selingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-1152311732162061292006-07-07T23:35:00.000+01:002006-07-07T23:35:00.000+01:00I should perhaps add that the main difference betw...I should perhaps add that the main difference between critics writing on romance and those writing on fantasy is that most of the latter a) are active readers, and b) therefore they know the genre and know what they're talking about. As you all know, the same cannot be always said about critics writing about romance ...Sandra Schwabhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15496019392789508611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-1152296634169210882006-07-07T19:23:00.000+01:002006-07-07T19:23:00.000+01:00Eric, do you already know Juliet Flesch's study on...Eric, do you already know Juliet Flesch's study on Australian romance, especially M&B? The title is FROM AUSTRALIA WITH LOVE: A HISTORY OF MODERN AUSTRALIAN POPULAR ROMANCE NOVELS. While the emphasis is, of course, on Australian writers and romances, she also says a lot about romance in general, and her theory chapter is at places hilarious (in a good way), because she tackles all these awful clichés and prejudices about romance.<BR/><BR/>Fantasy: There are two very good and relatively recent encyclopedias: THE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF FANTASY, ed. John Clute and John Grant (1997), and THE GREENWOOD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY: THEMES, WORKS, AND WONDERS (3 vol.), ed. Gary Westfahl & foreword by Neil Gaiman (2005). The essays in the last volume are about important works in fantasy fiction (and may I just add that I wrote the entries about dragons and about Peter S. Beagle's LAST UNICORN *smile*). One of the largest association in the field is the International Association of the Fantastic in the Arts (with an annual conference in Ft. Lauderdale in spring).Sandra Schwabhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15496019392789508611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-1152286040365621032006-07-07T16:27:00.000+01:002006-07-07T16:27:00.000+01:00Linda, I love these questions! Last night I found...Linda, I love these questions! Last night I found myself once again failing to make the case for a novel that I deeply love--and, more than that, a novel I admire, aesthetically. I think it's just a wonderful piece of work. My students were lukewarm, with one or two exceptions.<BR/><BR/>Now, I don't want to spend a whole lot of time in arguments over the relative merits of particular authors or books. I'm ready to accept that there will be a lot of novels that are very popular that I think are junk, just as there are a lot of popular poems (and poets) I think are junk. Quite a lot of popular food is junk food; why should books be any different?<BR/><BR/>What I'd love to see more of is well-crafted praise for what we think is really good and really interesting. <BR/><BR/>Does anyone out there have any recommendations for criticism I should read--not just of romance per se, but of other forms of genre fiction? Who are the best critics writing on fantasy, or on SF, or on mystery and detective fiction? What can I learn from them?E. M. Selingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-1152282166871936832006-07-07T15:22:00.000+01:002006-07-07T15:22:00.000+01:00Each of us, regardless of qualifications, will hav...<I>Each of us, regardless of qualifications, will have a very individual response to each book.</I><BR/><BR/>I won't mention the book's title or author unless specifically asked to do so, but since this incident happened just last night, I thought it might be of some interest. Or maybe not. (she said with appalling lack of self confidence.)<BR/><BR/>Having just finished reading a (c)1980 historical romance that I thought was pretty poorly done -- shall we say, D+? -- I was interested to see what kind of reviews for it I could find online. Virtually every single one was gushingly positive. "Best romance novel EVER!!!!" "Oh, I just want to find someone just like the hero!"<BR/><BR/>Most read like they'd been written by teenagers, so I tried to discount them. And were the "bad" reviews removed? Maybe, maybe not.<BR/><BR/>But this was a book that, by so many of my own personal literary standards, fell short. How do I, and by extension we, explain to readers who <I><B>just love</I></B> any given book that it's not acceptable in "the canon"?<BR/><BR/>To quote from another blog entry, <I>Despite my personal preferences, however, I think it is important to acknowledge that the level of historical accuracy in a romance cannot be used as an indicator of either literary merit or entertainment value.</I> It isn't just historical accuracy that matters -- it's character development, logical behavior under circumstances, even likability, and all these characteristics may be irrelevant to the vast majority of "ordinary" readers.<BR/><BR/>This can go right back to the wild popularity of certain authors, likewise unnamed, whose books are utterly unreadable by many reviewers. The books are poorly written, the stories bizarrely constructed, the characters stupid, cruel, inconsistent, whatever. But for some reason, these books and authors "speak" to the hearts of a legion of devoted fans?<BR/><BR/>Who's asking "Why?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com