Sarah's taken off on a voyage of discovery with her students (but not without first giving them some guidance about what to expect from their brand new genre). She's at Romancing the Blog today, letting us know how her students have responded to their first few classes.
The books on the syllabus are:
Pride and Prejudice, Jennifer Crusie’s Bet Me, Loretta Chase’s Lord of Scoundrels, Suzanne Brockmann’s Over the Edge, and then the students have a choice of Emma Holly’s Fairyville (erotica) or Francine Rivers’ Redeeming Love (inspirational). We’ve just worked our way through that most perfect of romances, Pride and Prejudice, but I started the semester with Monica Jackson’s free, online short story, “The Choice” (PDF link). We used it to examine the RWA’s definition of romance and Pamela Regis’s eight elements of a romance from The Natural History of the RomanceThe students' response to Monica Jackson's "The Choice" which was the "first introduction to popular romance fiction for most of my students", was overwhelmingly positive:
they loved it. They loved the feel of it. They loved its focus on the relationship and the emotional growth of the characters. They loved the paranormal element. They loved that it was about African Americans. They loved that it as about a woman who is not perfectly beautiful. They loved its optimism and the way it made them feel. In fact, they loved it specifically for everything that makes it a romance novel. And yet they’d never read anything like it before. And that was a great feelingSarah promises to keep us updated, but in the meantime please go over to Romancing the Blog to find out more about what she'll be teaching.
The illustration is a 1946 advert for the Ercoupe, taken from Wikimedia Commons.
The only thing I would say - and this is in support of Kimberley Kaye's response over on RTB - it would have been even better if she had included African-American or writers of colour on her list. She is after all teaching black women. It's great that they got a free read from Monica - she won't get any royalties from that while the other writers on the buy list will.
ReplyDeleteBesides including African-American writers - what about writers like Marjorie M. Liu or Caridad Pineiro? And not just when teaching a class of black women but any class.
Monica frequently blogs about how invisible African-Americans are when it comes to the romance industry and this is the kind of thing that she means. And it happens so easily, without people even being aware or conscious of being exclusionary! Sad.
Well, she did change her mind. :) I've changed Chase's Lord of Scoundrels to Beverly Jenkins' Something Like Love, so we'll see how that goes.
ReplyDeleteAnd since most of my students (I only have eleven) are buying second hand, the authors aren't getting that many royalties anyway.
Did you see Sarah's later comment at RTB? In response to Kimberley Kaye Terry's comment Sarah said that
ReplyDeleteyou’ve convinced me. I’m going to offer to my students tomorrow the choice of switching Lord of Scoundrels to Beverly Jenkins’ Something Like Love, because you’re absolutely right and I feel silly and wrong for not having thought of it.
As for
she won't get any royalties from that while the other writers on the buy list will.
there's a sad story regarding "The Choice" and royalties. On her website Monica says that it was originally "published in an anthology by Genesis Press. I no longer link to online bookstores carrying this because I have never received a single royalty statement reflecting their sales of my work (or payment) as contracted."
Good for you, Sarah! And no, I didn't realize they were buying second-hand.
ReplyDeleteI do understand why, in this particular case, a plea was made for greater use of novels by black American writers, but I also think that there is a potential problem in some of the thinking here.
ReplyDeleteFirst, it is often through good fiction that people best learn how to see through the eyes of those who belong to slightly, or even vastly, different cultures. I am sure I have absorbed more about American culture through reading American fiction than I have in my many visits to the USA, including one 4-month stay. On that basis, black American women should be reading the work of white writers, and perhaps even more importantly, white readers should be reading the fiction of black authors. We should all be broadening our horizons and looking outside our own limits. British romance readers can preen themselves on this, because we are so accustomed to reading about the strange, arcane customs of American life that we think nothing of it. The language is a bit odd, of course, and as for the spelling... :)
The second point may seem to militate a little against the first, but it doesn't really. It is that the whole craft of storytelling is based on the ability to see through the eyes of others; it should always have some universal meaning and application. Not only are the emotional experiences of human life common to all of us - love, joy, pain, grief - but a good writer should be able to tap into that universal baseline however different his or her social culture may be from the reader's. A good female writer should be able to see through the eyes of a man and vice versa; a heterosexual novelist should be able to create and develop convincing and sympathetic gay characters.
I am just a bit uncomfortable about the simplistic equation of readers and writers: black students? Well, they must read books by young black writers. White Southern US ladies of a certain age? Oh, they must read books written by Southern women of their own generation. Yes, fine: but they should all be reading other things too, otherwise they are walking straight into a kind of literary ghetto.
I enjoy reading novels by female British middle-class authors born before the middle of the 20th century, but if I had confined my fiction reading to that narrow band, I should have missed out on all sorts of wonderful books and wonderful insights into the lives of people very unlike myself. Literature should broaden perceptions and draw people of different kinds together in sometimes unexpected new groupings, not simply confine the mind within its existing boundaries.
I think it's a very tricky area to negotiate. At the moment, in a lot of places, AA romances are shelved with other AA books, not with all the other romances. That gives the impression that books by AA authors should be about AA characters and should be read by AA readers.
ReplyDeleteAs you say, Tigress, that's limiting to readers and writers.
On the other hand, precisely because there's that sort of segregation, AA romance authors tend not to be as well known among non-AA romance readers, and if the aim is to teach a course which is representative of the genre as a whole, then it's important to include AA romances.
Also, although I agree that (a) "the whole craft of storytelling is based on the ability to see through the eyes of others" and (b) that readers can enjoy reading about characters who have very different backgrounds from their own, it does begin to create a certain feeling of exclusion if characters who share particular traits with you never appear in the books you're given to read.
In addition, when choosing books as set texts for a course like this, the lecturer's choices could be interpreted as implying that the books chosen are among the best there is available. That makes it particularly important to be careful about how the selection is made. But it is, of course, a very short course, and I can imagine that Sarah would have liked to include many, many other books, by a whole variety of authors, but space is very limited.
Oh, I am not suggesting it is simple. After all, any novel could be classified under a vast number of different primary categories according to what characteristic(s) the classifier takes as the 'leading' ones; from 'long' and 'short' down to 'by white male author'/'by black female author', to 'with happy ending'/'with miserable, unresolved ending' to anything else we can come up with. Tossing them all into the air and letting them fall as they will would be an interesting exercise from time to time.
ReplyDeleteMy concern is about limiting horizons rather than enlarging them, and within the very narrow constraints of a short teaching course, it is impossible to address that in much detail. I just wanted to emphasise the fact that, because most people like to read stories about people similar to themselves, that tendency will look after itself. But anybody with an enquiring mind can become very interested in reading about people who are markedly different from themselves, and this is the trait that should be assisted and encouraged.
Historically, this has been a major issue for the writers and buyers of children's books: when Eve Garnett published The Family from One End Street in the (?)late 1930s, it caused no end of a stir, because it was about an impoverished, urban working-class family. That battle has long been won, but persuading the children of the proverbial single lesbian mother to read books about rich upper-class children living on country estates with ponies remains just as important as the other way about, if fiction is to increase understanding and empathy.
because most people like to read stories about people similar to themselves, that tendency will look after itself.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't it be argued that when reading romances, some people are looking for stories about people who are (at least in some ways) very different to themselves? Hardly anyone seems to want to read stories about Regency mill workers falling in love. Most people want to read about Dukes instead. Or Greek billionaires. Do most romance readers really have more in common with Greek billionaires? I'm not sure who paranormal romances or wallpaper historicals would increase empathy for. The empathy and understanding rationale for reading doesn't seem to work so well when the novels aren't realistic, though I suppose those novels might still increase one's general ability to feel empathy.
A more prosaic problem is that if people would like to read books about people like them, but don't know that such books exist, they may settle for reading other books. These students hadn't read romances before, so they might not have known what was available unless Sarah offered them a selection.
persuading the children of the proverbial single lesbian mother to read books about rich upper-class children living on country estates with ponies remains just as important as the other way about, if fiction is to increase understanding and empathy.
Seems to me that a lot of people recently have been reading about teenage wizards. But to get back to the issue of AA readers, I think I can recall Monica Jackson making the point, a long time ago, that most history taught in schools, most television programmes, etc feature white people, so it's not clear that AA readers are necessarily in great need of romances featuring white people in order to increase their understanding of, or empathy for, white people.
To be honest, I had totally forgotten about all the people who habitually read fairy-stories, fantasy, science fiction and so forth. Tunnel vision on my part, I'm afraid. I was thinking only in terms of contemporary settings in genre fiction, which I concede form only part of the range, where I believe that people are drawn to settings and characters that are reasonably familiar, or which they would like to be familiar - hence all the wealthy, high-status heroes. Don't you think that the heroines of the category romances in which the heroes are rich beyond the dreams of avarice tend to be women with whom readers can easily identify? Maybe I'm wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe other issue you have focused on is the matter of dominant cultures and sub-cultures within a single society. I said that it is probably more desirable that white Americans should sometimes read about black American culture than vice versa for that very reason. The sub-culture inevitably understands a certain amount about the dominant one, because it is regarded as the norm, whereas the reverse situation does not apply. Just as women, in general, are rather better at understanding male points of view than men are at understanding women.
"Just as women, in general, are rather better at understanding male points of view than men are at understanding women."
ReplyDeleteNow I like that! But how do you really know such things? Perhaps women think this way because they too see through the dark glass of stereotypes? We are all blinded by our own insights no doubt.
I posted earlier today, but apparently it didn't go through. Let's see if I can reconstruct.
ReplyDeleteIt was in response to AgTigress's comment: "because most people like to read stories about people similar to themselves, that tendency will look after itself. But anybody with an enquiring mind can become very interested in reading about people who are markedly different from themselves, and this is the trait that should be assisted and encouraged."
My question is, what about when I'm teaching students who have never read a romance? Aren't they stepping out of their sphere of comfort enough by the very act of reading romance? Should I push them further right from the start by introducing them to sub-genres that would make them more uncomfortable (erotica, inspirational, multi-cultural), or should I take as a victory that I can hopefully successfully introduce them to "mainstream" romances and hope that they explore more by themselves (with guidance in the form of a list of "good" romances in all the sub-genres and sub-fields I can think of)?
Sarah, are they readers at all? If so, you might survey them to find out what they like to read, and then choose romances that connect with those tastes (historical, humorous, paranormal, whatever) and then move farther towards mainstream romance, and then and only then do fringe stuff like erotical or multicultural.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of multicultural, I am watching, at the moment, Jack Hanna kissing a hyena.
For anyone who cares, I have posted to my blog again.
The issue is, I have them for six one and a half hour sessions, once a week. There will probably be fifty of them. I want the reading list to be in the course description so they can start buying and reading the books before we meet so there isn't a huge run on the books at the local B&N after the first class session. So yes, I assume that they are readers, but I need to plan the course and do my own reading beforehand, too. It's not as simple as polling them in the first class, especially if they don't have the first clue about the romance field.
ReplyDeleteSarah, I can see that there are specific challenges for you in this particular case, and I did try to signal that in the comments I posted above. I have only ever taught adult education courses, and trying to guess what precise combination of knowledge, ignorance, prejudice and openness any given group of students will bring to a class is well-nigh impossible until one gets to know them - by which time it is half-way through the course, and not easy to change things.
ReplyDeleteThe points I was trying to make are much more general, touching on the tendency I often see these days to assume that both writers and readers should be culturally compartmentalised. I know there are practical stock-control/sales display reasons for it, but I hate to see shelves labelled 'Black fiction' or 'gay and lesbian fiction', as though informing white heterosexuals that there cannot be nothing of interest for them there. Indeed, one feels that there is a virtual 'do not enter' barrier around them unless one belongs to the 'correct' readership.
I have mentioned elsewhere the novels of Jane Rule, to my mind easily the best Canadian novelist of her generation, and a very fine writer by any standards. Why is she not as well known as Margaret Atwood (or possibly Attwood)? Because she was always overtly gay, and her books, which invariably contain both gay and heterosexual characters, have therefore always been segregated into the 'gay & lesbian' category: their readership has been deliberately restricted.
I was simply making a plea for fiction as a means of widening social and cultural perspectives rather than as a means for confirming a narrow and exclusive world-view, but I accept entirely that in your current challenge of devising an effective course for these young women, the work of black writers and novels featuring black characters (which should not always be the same thing!) may be helpful.
Don't you think that the heroines of the category romances in which the heroes are rich beyond the dreams of avarice tend to be women with whom readers can easily identify?
ReplyDeleteI don't know how other readers feel about them. For myself, although I can maybe "identify" with some aspects of the lives/backgrounds/personalities of fictional characters, I don't think I've ever identified with a character in the sense of thinking that they're very, very like me. Am I'm meaning something different by "identify" than you do?
Perhaps women think this way because they too see through the dark glass of stereotypes? We are all blinded by our own insights no doubt.
Anonymous, I thought that AgTigress meant that women are, in general, more accustomed to reading books written by men and/or told from the point of view of male characters than men, again speaking in general terms, are accustomed to reading books written by women and/or about female protagonists. Certainly romance seems to be considered a "female" genre, mostly written by women for women. I think that's changing, and there are certainly both male romance authors and readers, but they're still in a minority.
I need to plan the course and do my own reading beforehand, too. It's not as simple as polling them in the first class, especially if they don't have the first clue about the romance field.
And even if the students did have a clue about romance, they might not choose books which would be easy to teach. People reading for pleasure may or may not prefer books which would provide good teaching material.
I suppose in theory one could think of something to say about any book, but in practice, I find that some books provoke more critical thought/analysis on my part than others. And as you're the one who's going to be doing the lecturing, it makes sense for you to choose books you can say something interesting about/which you think would stimulate interesting class discussions.
Identification with fictional characters: actually, I'm not sure exactly what I mean, since it is something I don't do myself. I am given to understand that many/most readers imagine themselves into the story, acting the part of one of the characters. But I had better not get into this, since the only 'identification' of which I am normally aware is with the author, not the fictional characters. I always see the characters in the story as though they are actors on a stage - I am watching them, not taking part.
ReplyDeleteProbably best not to get into the male/female thing here, either. In most human societies, women were and are a kind of sub-culture, with the masculine culture as dominant, and in all such situations, the sub-culture is normally better able to understand and even ape the dominant norms than vice versa. Women are usually far better at speaking and behaving like men than men are at speaking and behaving like women, and to do that, they have to have some understanding of masculine behaviour. Men don't need to do it, because society is tailored to their natural patterns of conduct in the first place.
Thank you for starting with Monica's "The Choice," and thank you for including a romance written by a black author to a group of black students. Multicultural romances are not fringe, some weird experimental "other." One of the many things we black authors fight is the perception that other ethnicities can't relate to our books, because of that assumption that readers want to read about people who are like them (how many vampire hunters do you know, or women entering marriages of convenience with their Greek tycoon bosses?)
ReplyDeleteWith the dominant culture being the white culture here in America, we've had plenty of experience with the majority's view. Many black romance readers will tell you that they started in their teens or later, and they didn't start with a black author. Many will tell you that they didn't "discover" black romances until a few years ago. There are even a number of black readers who don't read black romances at all.
Angela posted a survey in which the majority of the black respondents said that their last book bought/read was not by a black person. There are other fascinating responses which make the survey worth a look.
Again, thank you for including a Beverly Jenkins historical in the list. It's important for your students to know there is more to Black American history than slavery, and Beverly's books do that.
Seressia: Could it be that the books that might otherwise be published as "black romances" are being published as mainstream fiction or women's fiction? I can't think of the names offhand, but there was that one about the three women who hung out together at a beauty shop--saw the movie on TV. Not really all that different from, say, Crusie's BET ME. Same for romances involving characters raised in Asian cultures, where there is likely to be a lot more cultural difference than between American blacks and whites.
ReplyDeleteI do like the way that characters of different colors and persuasions are integrated into many more mainstream romances. I just finished JAK's SIZZLE AND BURN, in which the heroine was raised by a gay male couple; and her books more often than not have gay supporting characters. Nora Roberts's books have lots of strong black characters, though I can't think of any offhand that were protagonists. (But in the J.D. Robb books, both the Commander of the detective division and the Chief of Police are black. No one thinks anything of it.) In her latest, HIGH NOON, the hero, who had been totally neglected by his mother (father had run off) makes friends with a black lawyer and is basically adopted into the family--the matriarch of the clan giving him all the mothering he missed, even though he's now a grown man. When he takes the heroine to a family barbecue, they all just interact, with no one paying attention to anyone else's color. To me, that's ideal. I understand that black people do have a culture of their own that they don't want to abandon, but I think such cultures should enrich the lives of all of us, not create barriers between us.
That said, I am NOT going to eat okra!
Eating okra is a Southern thing, not a black thing. I don't eat it either.
ReplyDeleteIf the movie you refer to is Beauty Shop starring Queen Latifah, that is a mainstream, women's fiction story, not a romance (and a spinoff of the Barbershop movies.) It has a romantic element in it (Djimon Honsou, yum) but the storyline was more about her making her business a success than her love life.
I know you're not trying to be offensive, and I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but when people start taking about black romance, marginalization, or multiculturalism and hey, just be aware and maybe pick up a black author or two, we get kinda irritated when people come back with all the wonderful white authors who've been so forward-thinking and progressive by populating their books with black folks. Just sayin'.
My first book was an interracial romance. The heroine was raised by her white coach after she lost her family. Race wasn't an issue for her, but it was for some people around them. My last two contemporaries featured protagonists who are half-black, half Vietnamese (she took her white boyfriend and his daughter to the family barbecue with no issues either.) In my current paranormal series the adult children are half-black, half-Romanian. My interracial novella coming out later this month has the best friend who's Jewish and Hispanic. And let's not even get started on the slew of interracial romance authors who don't make race an issue in their books. So white authors aren't the only ones doing it.
I haven't read Nora's latest so I don't know the ethnicities of the main characters but based on your comment above, I can assume hero and heroine are black. Why would the family have an issue with that? But IRL, especially here in the South, if a black person brought a white romantic partner to the family gathering, someone in that extended family would make a comment, ignorant as it is.
So to me, I think it's important to show races interacting, even falling in love. But I also think it's important not to gloss over the racial difference either.
In Nora's book, the hero and heroine are white. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
ReplyDeleteMy mentioning the white authors who have black characters was meant merely to indicate that white readers are ready to accept black characters as supporting figures, so they are halfway there to accepting them as protagonists. It was meant as a comment on readership, not white authors--and of COURSE it wasn't meant to be condescending.
And the film I was thinking of was WAITING TO EXHALE, based on the Terry McMillan novel.
I forgot to mention that Jane Haddam, writing as Orania Papazoglou, has a series of mysteries involving the world of romance writers, featuring Patience McKenna, category author turned feminist journalist. They have settings like romance cons, book tours, and a writers' magazine, and titles like SWEET SAVAGE DEATH and WICKED LOVING MURDER. One of the characters is a black woman who is forced to write about white characters and can't go on tours or have her pic on her covers because her publishers are afraid the public will find out she's black. (These were written in the 1980s; thank God there's been SOME progress since then!)
ReplyDeleteI do like the way that characters of different colors and persuasions are integrated into many more mainstream romances.
ReplyDeleteTalpianna, I'm a bit curious about your use of the term "mainstream romances." Are you thinking about this in terms of the readership? I.e. do you mean romances that hit the New York Times best-seller lists? Or the romances which sell the most (which might, actually, be category romances, although they don't often turn up on the lists because of where they're sold). Or by "mainstream" do you mean romances which reflect social realities and have a realistic mix of people of different ethnic, social backgrounds, as well as of different ages and sexual orientations? If it's the latter then there really aren't a lot of "mainstream" romances around.
I understand that black people do have a culture of their own that they don't want to abandon, but I think such cultures should enrich the lives of all of us, not create barriers between us.
I'm rather wary of assuming that any particular "culture" comes attached to someone's skin-colour. Culture's something learned, and different people will be exposed to different cultural influences. All white people don't have one unified "culture."
And I'm not convinced that romances written about characters from a single racial group are automatically excluding anyone or creating barriers. It depends on a lot of other factors e.g. how they're marketed/distributed, whether books with characters from that racial group are pretty much the only ones available in bookshops etc.
white readers are ready to accept black characters as supporting figures, so they are halfway there to accepting them as protagonists
I'm not sure that assumption really holds, though. Over the years there have been many black supporting characters in fiction featuring white main characters. But they often ended up being stereotyped, or marginalised, or being killed etc.
Maybe I was a bit cynical with that last comment. The fact that some of these secondary characters who are non-white and/or non-heterosexual are also non-stereotyped and get their own happy endings probably should be taken as a sign that white, heterosexual readers are a bit more likely to find non-white and non-heterosexual characters acceptable as protagonists.
ReplyDeleteLaura, by "mainstream" (bad word choice) I was thinking of bestselling romance authors like Robb/Roberts, Krentz, Howard, and the like. I have no idea about categories, as I haven't read any in ages. I should have said something like "most popular," I suppose. I've been rereading a lot of J.D. Robb lately, so I was thinking of her particularly. Of course, these books are set some 50 years in the future, after the violent social upheaval of the "Urban Wars," so they aren't exactly depicting our society realistically. I must admit that except for Nora's books, I haven't noticed that many black characters in the others, though Krentz often includes gay characters.
ReplyDeleteBy "such cultures," I meant to include all ethnic/etc. cultures, not just black but Native American, various Asian, Italian-American, Jewish, gay, deaf, and so on. You may or may not know that there has been a backlash among the deaf against cochlear implants which restore hearing, as they consider it a form of cultural genocide. One of the big occasions for blacks here in Arizona is "Juneteenth," celebrating the day that news of the Emancipation Proclamation reached the Territory. Then there are powwows, Columbus Day parades, Highland Games, Greek festivals--all sorts of events that enrich the general culture. One wouldn't want to see them disappear, but one wouldn't want to see Italians and Indians fighting in the streets over Columbus.
I think gay characters and people of color tend to show up in the "hero/ine's best friend" category in romance. I read a lot more mystery than I do romance, and I watch detective programs like the various LAW & ORDER series, and there are plenty of people of color in unstereotyped positions like senior lab tech, detective, shrink, and the like.
I've had conversations with readers who "can't relate" to black heroines in romance, and therefore won't read them. Truly boggles my mind. If more white readers were willing to accept black protagonists in romance, wouldn't there be more crossover success for black authors? There are some--Brenda Jackson, Kayla Perrin, Beverly Jenkins for example--but why aren't more Kimanis on Harlequin's bestseller list? Or the USA Today list?
ReplyDeleteBTW, the J. D. Robb books aren't considered romance. They are romantic, but since the In Death books are more about the crime to be solved than the relationship, they aren't romance novels by the accepted definition. Terry McMillan's books aren't romances either.
Seressia, I should point out that I'm not your standard romance reader: I pretty much stick to romantic suspense and traditional Regencies, with an occasional excursion into paranormals. So I'm not up on the classifications. But back when I used to shop at brick-and-mortar stores, I always found the Robbs in the romance aisle.
ReplyDeleteIf I saw an intriguing romantic suspense novel with a black heroine, I'd probably pick it up. Same with mysteries, SF/fantasy, and other genres. Andre Norton, I think, was one of the first white authors to have black protagonists in her books. One of her children's books, Lavender-Green Magic, has two black children as protagonists; and in another, Dragon Magic, four boys of Scandinavian, Welsh, Chinese, and African origin, respectively, find a puzzle in an abandoned house whose magic power takes each of them back to a time related to their ethnic history. She also wrote Wraiths of Time, a fantasy novel about a black female archaeologist who falls back in time into the ancient kingdom of Meroe.
Again mentioning white authors. I'm obviously not making my point, which is that there are black authors writing black characters and if people were aware of them then we wouldn't have to mention all the white people putting black folks in their books like black people in books is a phenomenon.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, depending on which chain you shop in, you'll have to go to the black section to find books by black authors. For suspense, try Dee Savoy. Beverly Jenkins even has a few now. For horror, Brandon Massey or Tananarive Due, of her husband Steven Barnes for SF. I'm assuming you've heard of Octavia Butler and LA Banks, both fantastic storytellers.
Given the dearth of black writers making a living wage from their art, you'll have to excuse me for continuing to push them over established white authors who just happen to dial down the character color wheel. (Not that all white authors do this.)
You left out Samuel R. Delany.
ReplyDeleteWe are still misunderstanding each other. I am citing the appearance of black characters in books by white authors not because I'm recommending them as equal or superior to the writings of black authors, but as evidence that the READERSHIP of genre fiction is perfectly ready to accept black characters.
I haven't read Nora's latest so I don't know the ethnicities of the main characters but based on your comment above, I can assume hero and heroine are black.
ReplyDeleteI meant to say aren't black.
I'm familiar with Samuel R Delaney. Glad you are too. I was scanning the bookshelf behind me in my office, not the cases downstairs in the living room. I'd hoped you could add more than one to my list.
I still stand by my statement that if the readership is truly ready to accept black characters, then black books by black authors would have a larger market share.
I still stand by my statement that if the readership is truly ready to accept black characters, then black books by black authors would have a larger market share.
ReplyDeleteSurely we can blame marketing for at least part of this? It's not as if they don't deserve any freestanding blame that's hanging around....
Surely we can blame marketing for at least part of this?
ReplyDeleteYes, that does have an influence. It's a bit of a catch 22 with the marketing. Publishers and booksellers label/stock/shelve to reach what they think is the core market, but that in itself perpetuates the way in which the marketing continues to target the existing market rather than being marketed as romances for AA and non-AA readers. Obviously some people who would pick up romances by AA authors might not even see them if they're not shelved with the other romances. But there are also wider issues which are not just about the marketing.
I've seen just a few of the comments made by some white readers about "not being able to relate" to books with black characters, and I'm sure Seressia's seen far, far, more. And that's just from the people who aren't too reticent to admit to this sort of bias. I'm sure there must be others who think the same way but would never say/write it.
There are also the people who say that they read romance for the heroes, and they just don't find black men attractive.
I've heard that there are review sites that either won't review AA romances or think they need to find an AA reviewer (who's AA) to review them (as though somehow a white person wouldn't be able to).
And in one At the Back Fence column on the issue, "Both Templeton and Jackson have heard that when black authors' books are sold alongside white titles (not as a separate imprint, but as part of a larger imprint), those black authors sell fewer books than the white authors." And that last fact is no doubt one of the biggest motivating factors behind the catch 22 of marketing that I mentioned above.
Just a quick note, as I'm in deadline hell. I was curious about your class Sarah after reading your RTB article and wanted to see how your progression was going.
ReplyDeleteI think that the point I was trying to make on RTB was that in teaching a class on romance, it is necessary and very appropriate to include a novel written by a black author. Period.
No in depth reasoning will I go into on marketing, if characters are relatable to those readers not of color (of course they are! I have wonderful readers of all colors and I love every one of them!) I have my thoughts on this subject, but to go into an indepth discussion on this may give me a headache and raise my blood pressure. I'm getting old. I gotta watch my health ;)
What I will say is that these are young black women and men, and to not include a book written by a black author is a slap in the face, not only to the young students, but to black authors as well. What message is this sending out, not to include a novel written by a black author? Not really sure to be quite honest.
I choose not to argue about the whys of this, or debate it, as I have not the time, energy nor inclination.
I would think that in any class the instructor's job is to make SURE she's being inclusive. To that end, and for this class in particular, a mix of authors/genre's is golden.
As the instructor in this class, Sarah, you have a wonderful opportunity to do something not all can do, in an academic setting. You have an opportunity to introduce romance to a group of young people who may not read the genre, and yes, the books are second hand they're buying, but if the student enjoys the offering Sarah provides, she or he will go to the local bookstore and purchase, new, a book by that author.
She will tell her girlfriends about it. "Hey girl, I just read XX book in class and it was great! You gotta check her out!" word spreads.
As authors we rely on this oftentimes as the BEST promotion. Word of mouth and rave reviews from everyday readers have catapulted many to success. Zane is a prime example of this.
I grew up reading romance at an early age. At the time, there were no black romance authors. When the first ladies of romance came out in full force, as a black woman, I eagerly picked up their novels. I enjoyed many of them, and of course, there were some I didn't enjoy as much. Just like any other romance and any other author. We all find what works for us as readers, regardless of our race. But, give the student the opportunity to experience reading a romance written by a black author.
And Seressia...I'm a serious fan-girl of Ms. Beverly, lol! When I met her at the last Romantic Times Convention, I thought I was in heaven, girl! But, I resisted the urge to giggle and squeel. Barely. teehee...She is absolutely fantastic, funny as hell, and the most down to earth woman you ever want to meet. Even invited me out for chicken and waffles ;)
Okay, back to writing. I left one of my heroines tied to a pole somewhere, wearing nothing but a g-string and a couple of pasties. I better go untie her before gangrene sets in.
~KKT
Forgot to add: Seressia, I am SOOO with you on the okra front. YUCK! LOL!! My mother is from Arkansas and mi padre is from Louisiana, so I was brought up on the stuff. YUCK YUCK YUCK!!! :-P
ReplyDelete~KKT
Laura: Hardly anyone seems to want to read stories about Regency mill workers falling in love. Most people want to read about Dukes instead. Or Greek billionaires.
ReplyDeleteIn the US, a lot of category romances (e.g. Silhouettes, and some Harlequin lines) are populated by anything but billionaires. There are also *many* single-title romances with middle-income protagonists. Because of that variety, I used to think those lines were where a more multicultural perspective would most naturally emerge. However, that doesn't seem to be the case, if we look at Laura's AAR quote. Perhaps this is more evidence that Harlequin/M&B knows very well just how niche-oriented their readership can be--hence the separate Kimani line.
I'd bet that readers *do* identify with wealthy, titled characters. Part of that identification is probably in the aspirational sense--that's who I'd like to be--and that can have some sad racial overtones, if what black girls aspire to is to be a white woman! (I believe I read about an experiment along these lines on Monica Jackson's blog, but I can't find it in a quick search.)
However, I think there is also identification of a different sort--because dukes in romance often aren't just dukes, they're shorthand for "someone special". Characters who are wealthy, titled, or isolated by greatness fit in with the general trend of characters being incredibly gifted or perfect: they're all ways to signal that the characters are unique and special. And that's important to many people's self-identities--more than many external descriptors, I imagine. A reader's sense of self might not be all about "I'm a regular ol' person" but about "I'm someone unique and interesting".
In the vein of Laura's recent comment on perfectly groomed characters, it takes more skill and space for an author to write special characters without that "special character here" shorthand. If there isn't a socially-mediated stamp of "special" (money, position, title) then the character him/herself has to be far more developed in that direction. (Which is, I think, one reason for all the urban fantasy novels with a heroine who's ordinary on the outside but turns out to be kick-ass, beautiful, and supremely magical.)
Basically I'm saying that some of the reader's identification is with the "I'm special" coding of the characters, more than with the specifics of the character's circumstances. If so, then it's even more important that we have a whole different level of conversation about *which* stereotypes are held up as special and deserving in romances--white, male, titled, wealthy, exotic or appropriated, etc.
In the US, a lot of category romances (e.g. Silhouettes, and some Harlequin lines) are populated by anything but billionaires. There are also *many* single-title romances with middle-income protagonists.
ReplyDeleteIt's also true of some of the lines sold in the UK and elsewhere. The Medicals, for example, feature doctors, nurses and other medical professionals, and although I've come across some who are independently wealthy, they're in the minority.
But both in UK and US romances, even in settings which are closer to "normal," there's still an element of the stories being aspirational/feel-good. If the characters aren't rich, they're usually comfortably off, and they tend to end up being "rich" in terms of being surrounded by a loving community/family, and/or having an important vocation (law enforcement, medicine etc.).
As you say, there is a
general trend of characters being incredibly gifted or perfect: they're all ways to signal that the characters are unique and special.
Somewhat paradoxically, some characters are depicted as "unique and special" because of how "normal" they are e.g. they're the embodiment of the ideal "girl next door" sort of woman, who can cook well, loves babies and children, works hard and still has time to be involved with her community.
Sadly, I have a feeling (though no evidence to back it up) that when a lot of non-AA people think of novels featuring AA people, they don't get a "this will affirm my ideals/be aspirational" sort of feeling. They perhaps have a tendency not to think that the characters will be "unique and special." I suspect that there may well be a vague feeling that being black will make the characters' lives difficult in an unromantic way.
So again, I agree with you that
If so, then it's even more important that we have a whole different level of conversation about *which* stereotypes are held up as special and deserving in romances--white, male, titled, wealthy, exotic or appropriated, etc.
One other factor that perhaps affects white readers' attitudes to AA romance is the perception that AA romances will perhaps involve the white reader in being taught "lessons" about racism.
Laurie, in the ATBF column I linked to earlier, wrote that "My assumption was that a Multi-Cultural Romance either featured a mixing of races or offered teaching tools in the same way that Beverly Jenkin's wonderful historicals did." It seems that even though Laurie's revised her opinions about AA romances in general, at the time of writing the column she still considered Jenkins's romances as books which "offer teaching tools." And that makes me curious, because in a sense all romances could be considered to offer "teaching tools" inasmuch as all of them could be examined for what they tell us about contemporary society, contemporary attitudes to the past, etc. I doubt Laurie would call all historical romances which are good at recreating history "teaching tool," so I don't think the phrase is just intended as praise for Jenkins's skill at bringing the past to life. So is it that they're considered a "teaching tool" because they're seen as teaching AA readers about AA history? That could only be the case if the books were assumed to be aimed primarily at AA readers (in which case the white reader is implicitly taking a "that's their history not mine, and the book's not written for me" attitude). And perhaps white readers don't notice the ways in which historical romances with white characters can be considered "teaching tools" because what they teach has already been assimilated by the white reader? I don't know. I'm just speculating wildly here. But this comment from Robin Uncapher at AAR in another ATBF column, from June 2007 makes me think that some people are definitely drawing some conclusions from historicals with white characters, even if they wouldn't necessarily think of them as "teaching tools":
American culture does not descend from modern day England. It descends from an earlier England. England of the 19th century dominated the world, much in the way that America does today. In this way, I believe that Americans not only identify with 19th century English, we understand them better than many of their descendants who live in England today. Those descendants know a lot about their ancestors, but do they know what its like to be the focus of the national foreign policy of virtually every country in the world? Do they know what its like to feel, in some way, responsible for the world’s welfare?
This being Black History Month, why doesn't everyone who reads this and goes into a bookstore ask where the AA romances are, and suggest that they be featured in a display?
ReplyDelete'...do they know what its like to be the focus of the national foreign policy of virtually every country in the world? Do they know what its like to feel, in some way, responsible for the world’s welfare?'
ReplyDeleteYes, naturally; but we got over it. What comes later is called post-imperial guilt.
But the comment is an interesting one, and extremely revealing.
why doesn't everyone who reads this and goes into a bookstore ask where the AA romances are
ReplyDeleteThat would definitely be a way of showing bookshops that non-AA readers are interested in reading AA romances, and if enough non-AA readers did that (and then bought some AA romances) it might help to change shelving practices.
This being Black History Month, [...] and suggest that they be featured in a display?
I'm not so sure about this bit, because (a) there are many AA romances which are contemporary romances. In fact, my impression is that most AA romances aren't historicals (but I could well be wrong about that) and
(b) even the ones which are historical romances aren't non-fiction history.
So I think you'd have a hard time persuading a shop that a display of mostly contemporary AA romances was really related to Black History Month.
But the comment is an interesting one, and extremely revealing.
That's what I thought, Tigress. There are so very many things I could say about it, but discussing American foreign policy, neo-imperialism, historical accuracy, American identity and the implications of the feisty American heroines who turn up in Regency romances and charm the stuffy English aristocrats would take us far, far off-topic. And I'm not knowledgeable enough about any of those topics to do them justice.
I do think the quotation supports my assertion that historical romances written by white American authors are no more likely to be value-free, and therefore substantially different in terms of being a "teaching tool," from AA historical romances like Jenkins's.
The main difference that I can see is that most white readers of Regency romances wouldn't articulate their feelings about them as explicitly as Robin Uncapher did.
'There are so very many things I could say about it,...'
ReplyDeleteMe too, but I think a polite reticence is advisable.
:D :D
Your reticence is quite pointed. Ouch! :)
ReplyDelete