Pages

Sunday, July 01, 2007

Romance Novel Sermon


omance novels aren't usually the subject of sermons, but they were on the 17th of June 2007 at the Presbyterian Church of Laurelhurst. In the past I've posted about the theme of sin and redemption in the romance genre, and in that post I included a comment by Rev. Melinda. Now Melinda's posted a sermon in which she says that
romance novels, like so much other human art and expression—and indeed, like so much of our spiritual writing and faith life--and like our Bible passage for today, come to that—these novels deal with eternal and essential questions like “What is love? Do you love me? Do you know me? Am I worthy? Am I lovable? And how can I best reveal and express my love?”
I'd encourage you to go and read the whole of the sermon, but I'm going to quote from some of the passages in which she examines three common romance plots in order to discover what their underlying spiritual message. The first plot concerns the
powerful, handsome, wealthy Duke [who] falls in love with the mousy, intellectual, poverty-stricken, unsuitable governess—and sometimes she’s even in disguise—a woman no one else notices or thinks attractive. He sees her, though; he looks past the surface, sees through her disguise, thinks she is beautiful, and falls in love with the woman she really is.

I think this plot speaks to our overwhelming need to be seen for who we really are and loved anyway—even if we believe that “real, revealed self” is unworthy, or inadequate, or unlovable.
The second is about
the wild, frightening, tortured hero with dark secrets [who] meets a young sweet innocent woman who, against all reason, trusts him and believes in him. He saves her from disaster, and in turn he is changed and saved by her love.

Doesn’t this speak to us of our abiding hope that that that no matter what our dark secrets, sins or deficiencies, we can be loved enough to be forgiven, redeemed and saved?
and finally
In a marriage of convenience, the hero and heroine are forced to marry, usually at least one of them reluctantly and grudgingly. Along the course of the novel they encounter adventures, disasters, trials, and situations that require them to help, care, and support one another. Strangely enough they fall in love by the end of the book. Maybe because they’ve learned how to do loving things, and in the doing of love they’ve learned to embrace one another in love. [...] Love is not only a feeling. Love is a doing. Love isn’t something that happens to you. Love is something you do for others. It’s an active pursuit, a work of faith. And it’s revealed in your acts of service, your acts of kindness, your acts of mercy, your care for those around you who are in need.

The initial letter 'R' is an illumination in the Winchester Bible (1160-75), from the Web Gallery of Art. I hope it's alright for me to use the image, as it's for an educational purpose, this being an academic blog.

11 comments:

  1. In reading her three examples that you quoted, particularly as I've been studying classic fairy tales motifs and myths, I can't help but see these parallels:

    Ex.1 -> Donkey Skin
    Ex.2 -> Beauty and the Beast
    Ex.3 -> Eros and Psyche

    These timeless themes keep cropping up -- possibly, I suspect, because they speak to us universally on a subconscious level.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What an interesting take. I've always enjoyed the connection of love and the divine from a perspective that's more about the individual experience of divinity, rather than the individual's sense of self. Some famous examples:

    Of course the Song of Solomon, which Eric posted on recently.

    Similarly, the 13th-century Sufi scholar Rumi's love poems yearn toward and celebrate union--the reader can take it as written to the divine or to an earthly love. Rumi is earthy and ardent, and he believed strongly in the aesthetic as a way to come closer to god.
    Your love lifts my soul from the body to the sky
    And you lift me up out of the two worlds.
    I want your sun to reach my raindrops,
    So your heat can raise my soul upward like a cloud.


    William James also talks a lot about love. In his Varieties of Religious Experience, James gives a lot of weight to the idea of moments of "upliftedness" (in the presence of beauty, love, knowledge,...) feeling like being close to the divine. He also links love with rapture and the mystical, and quotes Saint Ignatius: "the soul grows by what it drinks in from the well-springs of the comprehension of love." He talks about the value of love in coming to knowledge (of the divine, but not only of the divine): "Love is well known not to be irrevocable, yet, constant or inconstant, it reveals new flights and reaches of ideality while it lasts."

    I'll have to think more about Rev. Melinda's perspective. Thanks for a provocative post.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rev. Melinda is a sensitive and spiritual human being no doubt, and I have to give her credit for a rather bold connection between popular romance texts and the Bible. In fact, I wonder how many people would sign on to the notion that just as literature was a powerful substitute for religion in the 19th century , popular romance has now, for some of us, become our 21st century version of spirituality. I actually hope that is not the case, but I am wondering about it. Of course I am also wondering about our fascination with Paris Hilton.

    ReplyDelete
  4. R, what's the tale of the donkey skin? I don't think I've heard that one, or perhaps I have, but under a different name.

    RfP, I agree that a lot of mystic poetry describes God as the beloved, for whom the soul yearns. But there are also suggestions that each of us can both show God's love, and receive God's love through human relationships, for example in Matthew 25: 37-40 it says:

    Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
    When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
    Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
    And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.


    Similarly 1 John 4: 7-8 reads 'Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.' Those are both examples from the New Testament, but I'm sure there are other, similar, statements to be found in texts belonging to other religions.

    Anonymous, re whether 'popular romance has now, for some of us, become our 21st century version of spirituality', I'm not sure if romance novels and a belief in love as presented in the genre has replaced traditional, religious beliefs. As Rev. Melinda has shown, the two are compatible and in inspirational romances the two are quite explicitly interwoven, but I suspect that for some people belief in the power of love, as expressed in romance novels, may be one of their core spiritual beliefs.

    It's certainly not difficult to find statements like this one, from a romance reader: 'I’m proud to say that I am a a big and firm believer of the power of love. I believe with my heart-body-soul that love exists' (by Mitchy, a reader commenting on the I Heart Presents romance blog). Romance authors can also be found making this kind of statement. Sharon Mignerey (who's written inspirational and other sub-genres of romance) writes:

    I really do believe that love conquers all. I can't think of a single personal or world problem that cannot be solved by love. My view is that evil, in whatever form it comes, isn't so much the opposite of love as the absence of love.[...]

    I believe that romance novels touch so deeply because they deal with the basic human need to be loved and accepted. All of us, at some level, want to be seen for what we are, warts and all, understood even when we don't understand ourselves, and accepted in spite of our frailties and our shortcomings.


    That last paragraph echoes what Rev. Melinda said in her sermon. And there are plenty of romance writers who have said things which, like the Nicene Creed, include the words 'I believe in'. For example there's Michelle Martin's 'I'm a romance writer because I believe in love and the power of love' or Virginia Kantra's 'I believe in the power of love to shape the world' or, though she doesn't use those precise words, Barbara Samuel's statement that 'We write romance because they are powerful acts of faith, acts of light in a dark world' (that was from here but last time I checked her site was down, so I got this from a cached version).

    I wonder if, in fact, this may be one reason (among a number of others) why the genre doesn't get a lot of respect from non-romance readers. I suspect that this level of faith in something intangible, in a world where so many people are cynical and where there is so much suffering, may seem naive, even foolish, to those who don't share the same faith in love.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Laura, your last paragraph there is really powerful. Lots of food for thought for me. That the kind of optimistic belief in the HEA actually existing seen as naive and foolish to some and therefore denigrates the whole genre is a fascinating concept to me. Huh.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, Sarah. I could be wrong, but I had the thought some time ago because of seeing so many statements from romance writers about their belief in love and because quite a few of the negative comments about romance have an edge to them which, it seems to me, can't just be attributed to doubts about the literary merit of the genre.

    Religion has been called the 'opium of the people' and although I can't find a reference for this, I think I can recall romance novels being compared to prozac; Christian tracts repeat the 'Good News', romances repeat the Happy Ever After ending; St. Paul wrote that 'after [...] the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe' (1 Corinthians 1: 21) and romance gets called silly fluff and then some romance readers say that they're happy with their fluff and they utterly reject literary fiction.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Laura, here's a url to the 'Donkey Skin' story online at SurLaLune: http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/donkeyskin/index.html

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Love is not only a feeling. Love is a doing. Love isn’t something that happens to you. Love is something you do for others. It’s an active pursuit, a work of faith."

    This is a fascinating line of chat, thanks so much for bringing it up! I'd say that for me personally, this is the reason that the whole "soul mate" plot doesn't work--there has to be struggle and courtship for the formula to work. Now think I understand a bit better WHY this is true for me.

    I'm particularly impressed, Laura, by your thought about the "naive, foolish" way that the romance formula is often perceived by those who don't partake, and think you have made an excellent point there, with much room for expansion and exploration! Yes, the HEA is a necessary component (you go, Sarah!) and while the genre allows a huge set of variations as to HOW one gets there, why do many people see this as inherent weakness? I'm curious.

    I've turned former scoffers into fervent romance readers just by choosing the right 1st book for them to read--HEA and everything. But somehow, once the scoffers actually experience the read, they get it. How far can this analogy help to illuminate (sorry, couldn't resist as your R was so gorgeous) the romance genre?
    andrea

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks, R. I think I've come across that story before, but not in quite the same version (I don't recall the incest theme). In this version the prince sees the princess in her fine clothes, so it's not exactly the same as if he'd fallen in love with her while she was still wearing the skins. However, as the clothing can be interpreted metaphorically, the distinction's maybe not as clear as it would be in a more realistic story (such as the Duke who falls in love with the governess, which is the romance plot you were comparing it to).

    Andrea, I'm glad you liked the 'R'. I have a lot of fun choosing pictures for the posts.

    I've turned former scoffers into fervent romance readers just by choosing the right 1st book for them to read--HEA and everything. But somehow, once the scoffers actually experience the read, they get it. How far can this analogy help to illuminate (sorry, couldn't resist as your R was so gorgeous) the romance genre?

    This reminds me that at AAR there used to be frequent talk of romance 'conversion kits'. It's a term which inevitably brings to mind the idea of romance readers setting out to evangelise the non-romance readers and get them to accept the good news of the HEA.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'd say that for me personally, this is the reason that the whole "soul mate" plot doesn't work--there has to be struggle and courtship for the formula to work.

    And continuing along the theological line of thought, it occurs to me that the "soul mate" plot is not totally dissimilar to the Calvinist doctrine of predestination. I don't want to get into a discussion of the theology of it (since I'm really not equipped to do so) but, like the 'soul mate' plot, it raises issues about free will and the extent to which the individual must 'struggle' in order to get his or her happy ending/eternal salvation.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Laura, I tend to think in symbols, so that's likely why I saw a similarity, and why my mileage was varied. :-)

    The prince didn't see the princess as her true self until he looked through the keyhole [ooh! does the king know his son is a peeper?], the keyhole being a metaphor that he had to alter the way he looked at things in order to see beyond the obvious.

    ReplyDelete