tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post7106284909921673922..comments2024-03-26T01:10:13.720+00:00Comments on Teach Me Tonight: Representing Mothers and ChildrenE. M. Selingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-65702612190934854892010-07-21T16:14:21.791+01:002010-07-21T16:14:21.791+01:00@Elizabeth: Or perhaps it's the mythic power o...@Elizabeth: Or perhaps it's the mythic power of fertility in any form that romance, because it must include a relationship, usually between a male and a female, draws on as unconsciously as society seems to hold that women should be mothers if they can be. <br /> Fertility, like motherhood, is a guarantee of the future, and ideas about it echo throughout our culture, from religion to economics. In the vast majority of cases, fertility requires contributions from two different sources. The embodiment of fertility is the child born from the union of the those two forces. <br /> If, as Krentz and her associates contend in "Dangerous Men and Adventurous Women," romance fiction has mythic overtones, this may be one of the most powerful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-561780167351162042010-07-21T15:45:59.775+01:002010-07-21T15:45:59.775+01:00@L.Vivanco: Well, for example, I'm "prej...@L.Vivanco: Well, for example, I'm "prejudiced" against those who break vows, and would most likely discriminate against those who break them. I am also prejudiced about advertisements that are actually "cons," and I am definitely discriminatory in that regard. Are these prejudices wrong? Somehow, the word "prejudice" has taken on a pejorative sense that has little validity. Holding to moral and ethical beliefs and prejudice often go hand and in hand, in my thinking.<br /> Perhaps the prevailing idea that womanhood presupposes motherhood does create prejudice, but if indeed family is the foundation of society--as many of the sociologists who decry the prejudice against women who choose not to become mothers would probably agree--the prejudice is not necessarily wrong, any more than being prejudicial and discriminatory about dishonesty is surely not wrong. <br /> At times of course, prejudice, even about dishonesty, can lead one into erroneous discrimination, as may also happen, for example, when women who cannot conceive are lumped in with those who choose not to.<br /> <br />dickAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62050706963747573342010-07-21T00:41:29.336+01:002010-07-21T00:41:29.336+01:00SuperRomance has a "miniseries" called &...SuperRomance has a "miniseries" called "Single Father" (I think you could search that term at the eHarlequin site to see a list). The one I've read is His Secret Past by Ellen Hartman--I wouldn't say the (teenage) son brought the couple together, exactly, but the father/son relationship is important. I can think of some historical examples, but the existence of the child is, in some cases, a spoiler.<br /><br />Dick, I think I agree, at least partly, that the epilogue baby is part of the taming/domestication of the hero--all those rakes who become doting fathers (this is often really evident when previous couples are shown in later books of a historical series). And I think that reflects a fantasy or ideal that many women have, of a father more directly involved in raising children: something that IS happening--so I think this reflects a social change, not a long-standing social ideal. These fathers are often shown as primarily indulgent playmates, not disciplinarians and providers--they seem to me like 2000s dads, not 1950s dads, to put it superficially. <br /><br />It's not that I NEVER want to see this ending--I am, after all, happily married with children. It's just that I would like to see romances reflect the broader array of choices people make today about marriage, childbearing, and childrearing, and sometimes it feels like they are enforcing a PARTICULAR ideal of marriage and mother/parenthood, because that idea is represented so prevalently. I do NOT think romantic love must include these things (though I agree it's not surprising that cultural images of it often do).Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09566602651931306545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-81928691863057807592010-07-20T19:45:08.089+01:002010-07-20T19:45:08.089+01:00Thanks for the suggestions, Trish. I'm in the ...Thanks for the suggestions, Trish. I'm in the UK so I rarely see romances from the Harlequin American line, unfortunately. Across here the <a href="http://www.millsandboon.co.uk/books/superromance.htm" rel="nofollow">Superromance</a> and <a href="http://www.millsandboon.co.uk/books/special-edition.htm" rel="nofollow">Special Edition</a> lines recently got merged into "Special Moments." There seem to be a lot of changes going on at M&B UK, actually, because in addition to planned <a href="http://www.millsandboon.co.uk/makeover/" rel="nofollow">changes to the covers and logo</a>, I've seen hints that various lines are going to be redistributed into two new lines called Riva and Cherish. You probably know far more about that than I do, since you write for them. I wonder if the Riva line's going to have a somewhat more chick lit sort of feel, and if that will affect the depiction of heroines vis-a-vis motherhood.<br /><br />Anyway, your mention of the Romance/Sweet line reminded me of just a few of the novels in that line about single fathers. Three in which the heroines help strengthen the relationship between the children and their fathers, which in turn creates a stronger bond between the heroes and heroines are:<br /><br />Ally Blake's <a href="http://www.allyblake.com/meanttobemother.html" rel="nofollow"><i>Meant-To-Be Mother</i></a>, in which the father works from home in order to spend more time with his little boy.<br /><br />Natasha Oakley's <a href="http://www.natashaoakley.com/book-millionairedadwifeneeded.html" rel="nofollow"><i>Millionaire Dad: Wife Needed</i></a>, in which the father has only just got custody of his young daughter and needs help communicating with her because he doesn't know sign language.<br /><br />Lucy Gordon's <a href="http://www.lucy-gordon.com/onesummerinitaly.html" rel="nofollow"><i>One Summer in Italy</i></a>.<br /><br />I can think of a few single fathers in the Modern/Presents/Sexy line too. In Kathryn Ross's <a href="http://tinyurl.com/368bmhf" rel="nofollow"><i>The Unmarried Father</i></a>, the father is very competent. In Susan Napier's <a href="http://tinyurl.com/2fwbfng" rel="nofollow"><i>A Passionate Proposition</i></a> the child's a teenager who's appeared rather unexpectedly but has previously had little or no contact with her father.<br /><br />"<i>That prevailing social attitudes can be prejudicial or discriminatory doesn't necessarily make those attitudes wrong</i>"<br /><br />Dick, I'm baffled. How can attitudes which are prejudiced and discriminatory not be wrong?<br /><br />"<i>if, as I somewhat tentatively posit, this particular attitude about motherhood is unconscious in origin, I'm doubtful it can be changed much</i>"<br /><br />I'm more hopeful about society's ability to change, given how many changes there have already been in recent decades. For example, it wasn't really that long ago that there was a huge stigma attached to illegitimacy and unmarried mothers, but nowadays the situation is very different.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-70621210433104216392010-07-20T16:46:33.920+01:002010-07-20T16:46:33.920+01:00@L. Vivanco:
That prevailing social attitudes can...@L. Vivanco:<br /><br />That prevailing social attitudes can be prejudicial or discriminatory doesn't necessarily make those attitudes wrong, and if, as I somewhat tentatively posit, this particular attitude about motherhood is unconscious in origin, I'm doubtful it can be changed much. Nor can I see how idealization of motherhood in romance fictions equates to discrimination or prejudice. Rather it's one of those things which simply is, part and parcel of the savior heroine who brings redemptive domestication to the feral hero, qualitatively not much different from the dictum that love conquers all, which is surely one of the fundamentals of romance fiction. The influence of the cult of the Virgin, no doubt--the symbol of ultimate motherhood which brought redemption to the otherwise lost. <br /><br />Well, I intended--something I thought the mention of yin/yang would accomplish--that balance meant the perfection of the joining of opposite genders (which accords I think, to your "relationship expected to last"). Balance and the circle created by the yin/yang are created by similar oppositions.<br /><br />dickAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-63031972695539747222010-07-20T15:29:10.244+01:002010-07-20T15:29:10.244+01:00"Can anyone tell me about a"romance nove..."Can anyone tell me about a"romance novel" that actually explores the father-child relation in terms of love--and how that kind of love then creates a stronger relationship between mother and father?"<br /><br />If Laura doesn't mind, I'd like to make a wee suggestion here - for these stories, while I actually write for the Harlequin Presents/Modern/Sexy line, I'd really recommend the Harlequin Superromance, Harlequin American Romance and Silhouette Special Edition lines. <br /><br />They're the ones referred to as the Heart and Home lines, and they are so fabulous at those core emotional story lines set around the family as you seek. I believe the Superromance and Special Edition stories are a little longer than the Hq American and so offer a little more in terms of being able to delve into the family dynamics, with more time to draw out those so important inter-character threads there just isn't the word count in for shorter books.<br /><br />Then of course, there's the Harlequin Romance line which is just so rich in emotion, and again, offers so many great story lines like you are asking.<br /><br />I wish I could summon up a title, but I can't help you right now. But I know you'll find the kind of books you're looking for there.<br /><br />Hint if you're not upover: if you're Downunder, the Superromance and Special Edition lines are published by HM&B Australia as Special Moments. Hqn Romance is published as HM&B Sweet. <br /><br />Good luck!Trish Moreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06180440910057143918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-87829980498693237322010-07-20T10:31:42.589+01:002010-07-20T10:31:42.589+01:00One aspect of the depiction of motherhood in the r...One aspect of the depiction of motherhood in the romance genre which I haven't mentioned so far, but which I think can be important in making explicit the importance placed on motherhood in defining "good" womanhood, is the figure of the hero's former wife or mistress, who refused to have children. <br /><br />If her choice to remain childless is associated with dishonesty, e.g. in the case of an ex-wife who tricks the hero by not mentioning her preference until after the marriage, or where her sole reason for remaining childfree is presented as a selfish one, then the result is to reinforce the idea that an admirable woman will want to become a mother.<br /><br />I think this figure is far less common in more recent romances, which perhaps suggests that hostility and distrust towards the childless-by-choice is perhaps getting a little less marked in the genre.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-66202056090590082772010-07-20T10:18:27.945+01:002010-07-20T10:18:27.945+01:00"Can anyone tell me about a"romance nove..."<i>Can anyone tell me about a"romance novel" that actually explores the father-child relation in terms of love--and how that kind of love then creates a stronger relationship between mother and father?</i>"<br /><br />If you mean children whose biological father and mother are the hero and heroine, there are the secret baby stories in which the hero doesn't know he's a father. He will often marry the heroine in order to get closer to the child, and that in turn brings him closer to the heroine.<br /><br />There are also widowed/divorced/separated single-parent fathers whose children bring them into contact with the heroine, who will then become a step-mother to the child/children. In that situation it could be that seeing the strength/development of the father-child bond makes the heroine feel more love for the hero.<br /><br />There are also single mothers whose children bring them into contact with a hero, who then becomes a step-father to the child/children. In these cases the relationship between the hero and the child could be something that makes the heroine feel well-disposed towards the hero.<br /><br />There are lots of romances with those scenarios.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-86261593064060976072010-07-20T03:54:02.732+01:002010-07-20T03:54:02.732+01:00I am wondering about something here based on this ...I am wondering about something here based on this discussion about "parents" and their happiness in relation to children. Can anyone tell me about a"romance novel" that actually explores the father-child relation in terms of love--and how that kind of love then creates a stronger relationship between mother and father?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-23391017943834942162010-07-19T23:29:41.994+01:002010-07-19T23:29:41.994+01:00"balance (read HEA) is achieved when opposite..."<i>balance (read HEA) is achieved when opposites are joined. Isn't that, at base, the subject of romance fiction?</i>"<br /><br />No, I don't think so. I think the subject of romance novels is the establishment of romantic relationships which are expected to last.<br /><br />While the individuals involved in those relationships are highly unlikely to be identical (although I suppose that would be possible, e.g. in a speculative fiction romance with protagonists who'd been cloned), there's no requirement that they be opposites. I rather enjoy romances in which the protagonists discover their underlying similarities. Jennifer Crusie's suggested that "the opposite character traits give the romance crackle, but they’re only skin deep. When you reach the bones of the characters, the stuff that keeps them upright and moving through the story, you find that the lovers are actually two of a kind" (<a href="http://www.jennycrusie.com/for-writers/essays/the-five-things-ive-learned-about-writing-romance-from-tv/" rel="nofollow">The Five Things I’ve Learned About Writing Romance from TV</a>").Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-21304513598385153732010-07-19T23:27:26.405+01:002010-07-19T23:27:26.405+01:00"That "admirable" includes being a ..."<i>That "admirable" includes being a "good" mother, doesn't limit it to that inclusion, I don't think. But even your citations suggest that most people do include that quality in womanhood.</i>"<br /><br />Indeed, many people do, and the quotations also show that prevalent cultural beliefs about motherhood, including unattainable ideals of "good" motherhood, cause problems for many women.<br /><br />"<i>Those women who choose not be mothers surely knew the prevailing attitudes on the matter before the choice was made.</i>"<br /><br />Firstly, there are many women who have fertility problems or who do not become mothers due to other circumstances outwith their control, and who therefore do not make a "choice" not to have children. Secondly, when a woman has made a choice not to have children this does not in any way justify the sort of prejudice and discrimination many such women encounter:<br /><br /><i>Dr Caroline Gatrell, a director at Lancaster University Management School, who has spent six years interviewing about 1,500 women, said: "Women who explicitly choose career over kids are often vilified at work and face enormously unjust treatment."<br /><br />In her new book, </i>Embodying Women's Work<i>, Gatrell reports that significant numbers of employers had admitted feeling that female employees who chose not to have children were lacking an "essential humanity". They viewed them "as cold, odd and somehow emotionally deficient in an almost dangerous way that leads to them being excluded from promotions that would place them in charge of others".</i> ("<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/17/career-women-mothers-work-children" rel="nofollow">If you're not a mother, you won't get on</a>." Amelia Hill, <i>The Observer</i>, 17 May 2009)<br /><br />"<i>I also don't think romance fiction will change the idealization of the heroine as mother because some readers choose not to be mothers.</i>"<br /><br />"Romance fiction" is not a sentient being, so there isn't a single entity which makes decisions about these issues. Of course there are general trends and expectations within the genre, but romances are written by individual authors, each with her or his own beliefs and experiences, and authors frequently push at the boundaries of genre conventions. Indeed, studies of the genre (I'm thinking in particular of jay Dixon's analysis of Mills & Boons) have found that there are often significant changes in the representation of heroines and heroes from one decade to the next.<br /><br />"<i>By the HEA, most heroines of romance fiction either welcome the state or look forward eagerly to it.</i>"<br /><br />That may be so, but quite a few authors have already written romances in which the protagonists choose not to have children, or are unable to conceive children. A few of them are listed <a href="http://www.likesbooks.com/childless.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-46683180106072252952010-07-19T22:33:16.383+01:002010-07-19T22:33:16.383+01:00"Finally, there've been a number of news ..."<i>Finally, there've been a number of news stories lately about social science studies showing that having children does NOT make people happier overall--often the reverse, despite the moments of joy being a parent brings.</i>"<br /><br />I saw an article just recently <a href="http://nymag.com/news/features/67024/" rel="nofollow">in New York Magazine</a> which mentioned some of those findings. It made for interesting reading. Here are a couple of quotes from it:<br /><br /><i>a wide variety of academic research shows that parents are not happier than their childless peers, and in many cases are less so. This finding is surprisingly consistent, showing up across a range of disciplines. Perhaps the most oft-cited datum comes from a 2004 study by Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize–winning behavioral economist, who surveyed 909 working Texas women and found that child care ranked sixteenth in pleasurability out of nineteen activities. (Among the endeavors they preferred: preparing food, watching TV, exercising, talking on the phone, napping, shopping, </i>housework<i>.) This result also shows up regularly in relationship research, with children invariably reducing marital satisfaction. The economist Andrew Oswald, who’s compared tens of thousands of Britons with children to those without, is at least inclined to view his data in a more positive light: “The broad message is not that children make you less happy; it’s just that children don’t make you more happy.” That is, he tells me, unless you have more than one. “Then the studies show a more negative impact.” As a rule, most studies show that mothers are less happy than fathers, that single parents are less happy still, that babies and toddlers are the hardest, and that each successive child produces diminishing returns. But some of the studies are grimmer than others. Robin Simon, a sociologist at Wake Forest University, says parents are more depressed than nonparents no matter what their circumstances—whether they’re single or married, whether they have one child or four.</i><br /><br />and<br /><br /><i>psychologists W. Keith Campbell and Jean Twenge [...], in 2003, did a meta-analysis of 97 children-and-marital-satisfaction studies stretching back to the seventies. Not only did they find that couples’ overall marital satisfaction went down if they had kids; they found that every successive generation was more put out by having them than the last—our current one most of all. Even more surprisingly, they found that parents’ dissatisfaction only grew the more money they had, even though they had the purchasing power to buy more child care. “And my hypothesis about why this is, in both cases, is the same,” says Twenge. “They become parents later in life. There’s a loss of freedom, a loss of autonomy. It’s totally different from going from your parents’ house to immediately having a baby. Now you know what you’re giving up.”</i> (from "<a href="http://nymag.com/news/features/67024/" rel="nofollow">All Joy and No Fun: Why parents hate parenting</a>." by Jennifer Senior, published Jul 4, 2010)<br /><br />"<i>Laura, I'm amazed by your ability to find and synthesize so many sources in your posts and comments. Vague allusions are all I'm up for.</i>"<br /><br />Thanks, Elizabeth. I do spend rather a lot of time online, which I can do because I'm a stay-at-home-parent. I suppose in order to qualify as a "good" mother I should really be baking cookies, painting a white picket fence etc. ;-)Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-13475954621947991872010-07-19T16:01:54.780+01:002010-07-19T16:01:54.780+01:00@Elizabeth:
In real life, I would certainly agree...@Elizabeth:<br /> In real life, I would certainly agree that having children doesn't necessarily make people happier overall. One corner of my mind, though, holds to the idea that biological forces almost insist children result from a joining of male/female. And perhaps that insistence is part of the collective unconscious which many suppose affects us all. <br /><br />An aside: I've been reading Jayne Castle's futuristics in the past few weeks, and I was struck by the "principle of synergy" which runs throughout the series. That principle is a very near reiteration of the necessity of the idea underlying the yin/yang--balance (read HEA) is achieved when opposites are joined. Isn't that, at base, the subject of romance fiction?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-77677686959972491982010-07-19T15:48:08.866+01:002010-07-19T15:48:08.866+01:00@L. Vivanco: That "admirable" includes b...@L. Vivanco: That "admirable" includes being a "good" mother, doesn't limit it to that inclusion, I don't think. But even your citations suggest that most people do include that quality in womanhood. Those women who choose not be mothers surely knew the prevailing attitudes on the matter before the choice was made. And I also don't think romance fiction will change the idealization of the heroine as mother because some readers choose not to be mothers. By the HEA, most heroines of romance fiction either welcome the state or look forward eagerly to it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-7425091434755839282010-07-19T00:59:42.575+01:002010-07-19T00:59:42.575+01:00This post made me think of Frankenstein, a horror ...This post made me think of Frankenstein, a horror novel of sorts written by a pregnant woman, which many people interpret as being in part about fear of having children (what if it's a monster?).<br /><br />I do think there's a lot of idealization of mothers/parenting in romance--at least when it comes to the hero and heroine (their own parents are often dreadful--so I don't know where h/h learn to be so good at it). I know that Dick thinks romances are all about procreating, but as only a half-decent parent, I find the constant idealization and insistence on epilogue babies tiresome. <br /><br />I've read a couple of historicals recently in which one partner had an illegitimate child that was immediately loved and accepted by the other (and vice versa). And some contemporaries where more or less the same thing happened. While I don't mind the creation of a new family unit as part of the HEA--better than a genre populated by evil step-parents and monstrous step-children--many of these endings have seemed overly simple, saccharine, and happy-clappy. It's odd that even in a novel where the hero and heroine's falling in love is depicted as gradual and conflict-ridden, the child is calling the new parent "daddy" in a week. I think it would be more truly respectful of the importance of the parent-child relationship to show the development of one more realistically.<br /><br />Finally, there've been a number of news stories lately about social science studies showing that having children does NOT make people happier overall--often the reverse, despite the moments of joy being a parent brings. Laura, I'm amazed by your ability to find and synthesize so many sources in your posts and comments. Vague allusions are all I'm up for.Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09566602651931306545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-87984768279027554432010-07-18T17:40:05.293+01:002010-07-18T17:40:05.293+01:00Why would an "admirable" heroine be &quo...<i>Why would an "admirable" heroine be "problematic, upsetting, or offensive" to any reader?</i><br /><br />If the minimum standard for being "an admirable representative of womanhood [...] in most people's minds includes being a 'good' mother," then a book which adopts this standard necessarily implies that women who do not wish to become mothers, or who for other reasons do not become mothers, are in some way deficient and therefore not so admirable, and that mothers who do not reach the standard set for "good" motherhood are also deficient and therefore not so admirable.<br /><br />Women who are not mothers, women who are not perceived as "good mothers," and women who do not perceive themselves as "good mothers" are affected by prevailing cultural attitudes about motherhood:<br /><br /><i>Scholars have found that nearly all childless women felt that they faced some disapproval from friends and family. Somers (1993) reported that childless women believed that they were viewed negatively on a variety of measures (seen as selfish, abnormal, immature, unfortunate, unnatural, unhappily married, irresponsible, maladjusted, unfulfilled, having a dislike of children).</i> (Kelly 165)<br /><br />According to Maher and Saugeres,<br /><br /><i>Dominant constructions of good mothering suggest that mothers need to be intensely focused on childrearing, and this construction of mothering may be seen as engendering guilt in women who mother and encouraging women without children to view mothering as an all-encompassing and potentially engulfing experience.</i> (6-7)<br /><br />Edhborg et al, who studied "a sample of Swedish women reporting depressive symptoms at two months postpartum" (262) found that<br /><br /><i>The women described many moral beliefs regarding the definition of a ‘‘good mother’’. A ‘‘good mother’’ would be happy when she got a healthy child, have patience with all her children, always think about the children before herself, and she would breastfeed her children. As a consequence of this belief, women felt guilt and like a ‘‘bad mother’’ if they were not immediately happy about the new child but instead wanted personal space and time for themselves. All mothers had expectations of breastfeeding their children and if they were not able to do it they felt as though they had failed as mothers.</i> (264)<br /><br />Most people do not enjoy being made to feel guilt, or being made to feel that they are "selfish, abnormal, immature, unfortunate, unnatural, unhappily married, irresponsible, maladjusted, unfulfilled." <br /><br />I was assuming that a childless reader or one who does not conform to particular standard of what constitutes a "good" mother might therefore feel upset/offended/irritated if she found that her leisure reading echoed those prevailing social attitudes by having adopted a standard for what constitutes an "admirable" woman which implies that the reader herself is neither admirable nor good.<br /><br />----<br /><br />Edhborg, Maigun, Malin Friberg, Wendela Lundhi and Ann-Marie Widstrom. "<a href="http://www.superasampa.com.br/artigos/depressao_pos_parto.pdf" rel="nofollow">‘Struggling with life’: Narratives from women with signs of postpartum depression.</a>" <i>Scandinavian Journal of Public Health</i> 33 (2005): 261–267.<br /><br />Kelly, Maura. "Women's Voluntary Childlessness: A Radical Rejection of Motherhood?" <i>WSQ: Women's Studies Quarterly</i> 37.3 & 4 (2009): 157-172.<br /><br />Maher, JaneMaree and Lise Saugeres. "<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/planet/cryssgodoy/pdfs/2BorNot_1.pdf" rel="nofollow">To be or not to be a mother?: Women negotiating cultural representations of mothering</a>." <i>Journal of Sociology</i> 43 (2007): 5-21.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-87487464951169362032010-07-18T15:20:16.134+01:002010-07-18T15:20:16.134+01:00@T. Morey: Sorry about the typo; eyes and hands s...@T. Morey: Sorry about the typo; eyes and hands sometimes quarrel.<br /> <br />@L. Vivanco: I'm puzzled. Why would an "admirable" heroine be "problematic, upsetting, or offensive" to any reader? <br /><br />dickAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-88073247371400614012010-07-18T03:28:02.869+01:002010-07-18T03:28:02.869+01:00Ms Money I wish:-))
But thank you Dick. I'd r...Ms Money I wish:-))<br /><br />But thank you Dick. I'd refine what you wrote just a little and say the heroine has to be someone the reader can empathise with and a woman the reader can barrack for. She can be flawed - indeed she should be to be real - but our heroines don't, for example, go around speeding through school crossings or kicking cats.Trish Moreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06180440910057143918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-9839709166844992522010-07-17T17:20:52.246+01:002010-07-17T17:20:52.246+01:00"The fact of its huge worldwide sales means i..."<i>The fact of its huge worldwide sales means it's tapping into, indeed celebrating, universal emotions and experiences.</i>"<br /><br />I suppose it depends what you mean by "universal." Clearly not everyone experiences love and motherhood in the same way or feels the same emotions when they think about them.<br /><br />"<i>If you don't like them ,the choice is easy. Just don't read the books.</i>"<br /><br />That solution would be the obvious one if the reader objected to any depiction of romantic love as something which can last a lifetime. Someone who found that objectionable would be likely to find all romances objectionable since they're all about romantic relationships which, either implicitly or explicitly, are shown to be permanent.<br /><br />However, other readers may really enjoy the central aspects of the genre (i.e. the focus on the development of a romantic relationship and the promise of a happy ending) but find a few issues/story types/character types problematic. In some cases the advice to "Just don't read the books" may still apply, if the reader can identify "the books" which she needs to avoid. Covers, titles, and blurbs often help with that.<br /><br />"<i>Seems to me the point of romance fiction is to make the heroine an admirable representative of womanhood, which in most people's minds includes being a "good" mother.</i>"<br /><br />I don't agree with you that "the point of romance fiction is to make the heroine an admirable representative of womanhood," but thank you for summarising a view of womanhood which, when expressed implicitly or explicitly in some romances, might make them problematic/upsetting/offensive to some romance readers.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-22081280373204967252010-07-17T15:42:04.438+01:002010-07-17T15:42:04.438+01:00I agree with Ms. Money. Seems to me the point of ...I agree with Ms. Money. Seems to me the point of romance fiction is to make the heroine an admirable representative of womanhood, which in most people's minds includes being a "good" mother. Even in the book cited, the implication seems to be that the heroine's abandoning her child was for the good of the child. Only by that action on the heroine's part could her image as a valid romance heroine be preserved. An unusual hook, though.<br /><br />dickAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-80196501963185146092010-07-17T14:13:52.158+01:002010-07-17T14:13:52.158+01:00"I think I'd also separate out the protec...<i>"I think I'd also separate out the protectiveness from the "love" and the "liking" because I think you can feel protective of a baby (or any other small creature) without necessarily feeling either liking or love. Admittedly it probably depends on which definition of "love" one's using".</i><br /><br />That's a fair point, Laura. An adult can feel protective towards a small child or an animal who is completely unknown to him/her, just on principle.AgTigressnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-40079313440997530662010-07-17T13:55:17.089+01:002010-07-17T13:55:17.089+01:00"For some people, depictions intended to reca..."For some people, depictions intended to recall "precious snapshots" or inspire happy fantasies, may instead recall feelings of disillusionment, inadequacy or pain."<br /><br />Of course. Romance isn't trying to be everything to everyone. The fact of its huge worldwide sales means it's tapping into, indeed celebrating, universal emotions and experiences.<br /><br />If you don't like them ,the choice is easy. Just don't read the books.Trish Moreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06180440910057143918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-50685815869573925972010-07-17T12:55:56.189+01:002010-07-17T12:55:56.189+01:00"I think there is also an important differenc..."<i>I think there is also an important difference between instinctive maternal feelings of love and protectiveness, and actual liking of one personality for another.</i>"<br /><br />I basically agree with you, but I think I'd also separate out the protectiveness from the "love" and the "liking" because I think you can feel protective of a baby (or any other small creature) without necessarily feeling either liking or love. Admittedly it probably depends on which definition of "love" one's using.<br /><br /><i>The different expectations of each genre assign how the author can treat different subject matter.</i><br /><br />I'm sure you're right, and I suspect there are plenty of other romance conventions which I don't think about much, because I'm so used to them.<br /><br /><i>It's entertainment. For example, we don't see the heroine washing dishes. Our readers (and we writers!) get to do that all the time. Who wants to read about it?</i><br /><br />Yes, but we do sometimes read about heroines cooking, and for me cooking is not entertainment! But perhaps I'm in a minority in feeling that way. I know TV cooking shows are very popular.<br /><br /><i>romance reminds her of those special moments. Romance brings back those precious snapshots that maybe this rotten day had made her forget. It reminds her of that heady thrill of falling in love, it reminds her of the first time she made love (or how she’d wished it had been), it reminds her of the first time her newborn baby opened her eyes and squinted up at her and she fell in love all over again.</i><br /><br />I wonder if this is one of the reasons why some people really don't like romance: if you're someone for whom those "moments" bring back painful memories, romance isn't going to be entertaining or escapist, unless, as you suggest, you're a reader who enjoys imagining "how she’d wished it had been."<br /><br />For some people, depictions intended to recall "precious snapshots" or inspire happy fantasies, may instead recall feelings of disillusionment, inadequacy or pain. For example, quite a few of the criticisms I've read of the genre seem to come from people who don't believe that romantic love can last, and so I'd assume that for them romances may act as a reminder of their disillusionment and/or appear to be a genre which perpetuates what they consider to be a lie.<br /><br />This brings me back to a conclusion I've reached before, which is that readers differ widely from each other, not just in their personal experiences outside the fiction, but also in how they position themselves in relation to those texts (e.g. do they identify with a heroine, a hero, both, neither?) and what they hope to gain from reading (e.g. to have particular emotions evoked, to be intellectually stimulated, to be reassured, etc). An escapist story which delights someone who identifies with the heroine, might have the opposite effect on someone who contrasts herself with the heroine.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-70483414471382954722010-07-17T09:30:40.629+01:002010-07-17T09:30:40.629+01:00"Those examples were all created by fathers, ..."Those examples were all created by fathers, whereas romances are far more likely to be written by women. Is that just a coincidence? And does the romance genre, as a whole, represent motherhood and children in an idealised way or is it relatively realistic?"<br /><br />I think it's probably horses for courses. More men write horror, I’m guessing. And I know more women write romance. The different expectations of each genre assign how the author can treat different subject matter. Which makes a romance author enduring school holidays, when there is anything but romantic thoughts swirling around your head, very envious of a horror writer! <br /><br />But yes, with the exception of books like Kate Walker's Kept for her Baby, motherhood is perhaps a little idealised. And there are a goodly number of reasons for that.<br /><br />The books - if we're talking category fiction - are short. Fifty thousand words in which to get a hero and heroine together, confront them with seemingly insurmountable odds, and get them to their happy ever after, or happy beginning, which is more often what it is. There is time for the hero and the heroine and what's happening between them. There is no space for complicated sub-plots and a cast of thousands.<br /><br />Secondly, romances are upbeat. They are, especially in the case of the Presents/Modern/Sexy line, all about fantasy and escapism. It's entertainment. For example, we don't see the heroine washing dishes. Our readers (and we writers!) get to do that all the time. Who wants to read about it? <br /><br />The same goes with babies/kids. Just as there is no space to detail real life with baby and those drudge days that never seem to end, (that is, unless it is crucial to the story line), the reader doesn't want to find pages detailing the day she's just had. There is no escapism in reading about real life. And the reader is fully aware of this. She knows this is fiction she's reading. But romance reminds her of those special moments. Romance brings back those precious snapshots that maybe this rotten day had made her forget. It reminds her of that heady thrill of falling in love, it reminds her of the first time she made love (or how she’d wished it had been), it reminds her of the first time her newborn baby opened her eyes and squinted up at her and she fell in love all over again.<br /><br />You know, it’s really nice writing about the good stuff!Trish Moreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06180440910057143918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-71782733075806099812010-07-16T10:16:29.000+01:002010-07-16T10:16:29.000+01:00Yes, Truby King was a Kiwi, but I think it was in ...Yes, Truby King was a Kiwi, but I think it was in the USA that his methods became most popular in the 30s. Then of course Spock came along and changed all that later. Interesting that these debates still continue -- and that people really heed them. Throughout most of human history, mothers of young babies would simply have followed the traditions of their own communities, which varied.<br /><br />The one, huge factor that undermines all the generalisations is that babies are people, and people are not all the same; individual personality of both parent and child will affect the methods that work best in caring for the child. I think there is also an important difference between instinctive maternal feelings of love and protectiveness, and actual <i>liking</i> of one personality for another. There are plenty of parents who 'love' one or more of their children, but don't actually LIKE them all that much, don't understand a particular child's character or sympathise with his world-view. I suspect that that can start very early, and can give rise to life-long tensions.AgTigressnoreply@blogger.com