# Womens Fic vs Romance



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Where do you draw the line between women's fiction and romance? I wrote what I thought was a contemporary romance, but I've gotten a lot of pushback from romance readers (especially the people who volunteered to read my book in exchange for a review on Goodreads - eek) because of things in my book that don't fit into the contemporary romance box.

What would make a book fit firmly into women's fic or firmly into romance? What might alienate readers in either genre?


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Romance has to end _happily ever after_, or at least _happy for now._


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Does it have HEA or at least HFN?  That's the first--and biggest--criterion.


----------



## kathrynoh (Oct 17, 2012)

As well as the HEA, the relationship should be the central focus of the book for romance.


----------



## Capella (Jan 16, 2014)

What are the readers saying? I sometimes think certain readers have different expectations of genre that you wouldn't necessarily want to cater to. If you share the type of comments we can weigh in. That's easier than explaining the whole genre.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

I'm finishing up a trilogy right now that I just realized is ending up being women's fiction. The first two books are definitely romance, but the last one is not.

RWA says women's fiction  "a commercial novel about a woman on the brink of life change and personal growth. Her journey details emotional reflection and action that transforms her and her relationships with others, and includes a hopeful/upbeat ending with regard to her romantic relationship."

Romance sells a lot better than women's fiction.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Romance is the fantasy that love conquers all. 

Women's fiction shows what it is really like to be a woman.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Well, this is my interpretation of the comments/reviews, but...

A lot of readers didn't like the cheating.

A lot of readers didn't like how realistic/3d/subtle the characters are. They went in with a certain expectation of how the story would play out (where they got this expectation, I do not know. It wasn't in the blurb!), and they were upset that the characters didn't conform to the tropes in their head.

A lot of readers didn't like that the heroine is flawed/damaged. They really, really didn't like that. (Some readers loved this, but a lot hated it).

It is HFN.

I am planning on making the series realistic(ish). A relationship with real problems. In the end, love will conquer all, but it's not going to be syrupy sweet or saccharine.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

No cheating in romance. Sorry. You can maybe get away with it in m/m, but not in m/f. 

Readers got the impression of how the story would play out from the conventions of the romance genre. 

I can't say for sure that the book is women's fiction, but it's definitely not romance.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Even though my books are largely romance, I always put women's fiction in the keywords. Just to cover allbases.


----------



## rosclarke (Jul 12, 2013)

CrystalKay said:


> Well, this is my interpretation of the comments/reviews, but...
> 
> A lot of readers didn't like the cheating.


Yeah, that's something that a lot of romance readers won't want to read about. It doesn't necessarily mean your book isn't romance, but it does mean it's unlikely to be a bestselling romance.



> A lot of readers didn't like how realistic/3d/subtle the characters are. They went in with a certain expectation of how the story would play out (where they got this expectation, I do not know. It wasn't in the blurb!), and they were upset that the characters didn't conform to the tropes in their head.


Romance is full of realistic, three-dimensional, subtle characters. I'd be surprised if that was genuinely the problem. I wonder if the problem is more that as the characters change and/or show their different sides, you didn't show their motivation or character clearly enough. If a person who has always appeared one way suddenly starts acting another way, then you need to make sure that you've made that convincing.



> A lot of readers didn't like that the heroine is flawed/damaged. They really, really didn't like that. (Some readers loved this, but a lot hated it).


This is trickier. Flawed and damaged heroines are very common in romance, but only in certain ways. There's more leeway in, for example, NA than historical. But if your book is dealing with really deep angst, then it won't appeal to some kinds of romance readers.

It does sound to me as if maybe you're getting these criticisms because of a signalling/branding problem. Your title, cover and blurb will set up certain expectations for readers who are familiar with the nuances of the genre (and romance is a broad genre with a LOT of different subgenres). But if your book doesn't match those expectations, you'll get disappointed readers and bad reviews. I would look again at how you are presenting the book and see if you can make changes which spell out much more clearly what readers should expect from it. Then you'll get the readers who will actually love it and not the ones who won't.


----------



## Jennifer Lewis (Dec 12, 2013)

In romance it's crucial for the heroine to be sympathetic, even if she's flawed/damaged. In women's fiction she probably just needs to be intriguing.

And I agree on the branding. It's very important not to attract the wrong audience! I've done that before--ouch


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

If you're marketing it as a romance you stray from the traditional 'Mills & Boon' scenarios at your peril  . My book was aimed at romance readers who are tired of the traditional predictable ending and wanted a story with a bit more to it than just the romance, although the romance plays a huge part and the book ends with a HEA. I managed to reach a few of these readers who loved the story, but a freebie advertising it as a romance gleaned some poor reviews from readers who were disappointed that it did not pan out in the usual traditional predictable ending  .  

It's not really 'women's fiction' as the MC is a man,so I'm in a bit of a quandary how to market it  .


----------



## rosclarke (Jul 12, 2013)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> If you're marketing it as a romance you stray from the traditional 'Mills & Boon' scenarios at your peril . My book was aimed at romance readers who are tired of the traditional predictable ending and wanted a story with a bit more to it than just the romance, although the romance plays a huge part and the book ends with a HEA. I managed to reach a few of these readers who loved the story, but a freebie advertising it as a romance gleaned some poor reviews from readers who were disappointed that it did not pan out in the usual traditional predictable ending .
> 
> It's not really 'women's fiction' as the MC is a man,so I'm in a bit of a quandary how to market it .


There's plenty of very successful single title (i.e. not M&B style category) romance out there, with plots and subplots and interesting setting and worldbuilding. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by not having the usual predictable ending. You say it has an HEA, which is really the only non-negotiable. I guess it may need to be said explicitly that romance readers will expect that HEA to involve the two main characters whose romance is the centre of the story. You can't switch someone else into that role just to give a happy ending.

I honestly think that there is only one way to fully understand what readers of a genre are looking for, and that is by reading widely in that genre. Of course you can cross lines and push boundaries in your own writing, but you need to know what those lines are and why they are there in order to do so successfully. Reading widely also has the advantage of knowing where to position your book within the genre and therefore making better decisions about things like the cover, title and blurb.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

rosclarke said:


> There's plenty of very successful single title (i.e. not M&B style category) romance out there, with plots and subplots and interesting setting and worldbuilding. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by not having the usual predictable ending. You say it has an HEA, which is really the only non-negotiable. I guess it may need to be said explicitly that romance readers will expect that HEA to involve the two main characters whose romance is the centre of the story. You can't switch someone else into that role just to give a happy ending.
> 
> I honestly think that there is only one way to fully understand what readers of a genre are looking for, and that is by reading widely in that genre. Of course you can cross lines and push boundaries in your own writing, but you need to know what those lines are and why they are there in order to do so successfully. Reading widely also has the advantage of knowing where to position your book within the genre and therefore making better decisions about things like the cover, title and blurb.


Thanks. Do you know any titles off-hand so that I can see how they are prompting their books?


----------



## Cheryl Douglas (Dec 7, 2011)

CrystalKay said:


> Well, this is my interpretation of the comments/reviews, but...
> 
> A lot of readers didn't like the cheating.
> 
> ...


I have gotten beaten up by reviews in the past where there was cheating involved and the H/H wasn't likeable. It didn't matter that I redeemed the characters. Some people don't make it far enough to appreciate the redemption. If they don't like the character they stop reading and give you a lousy review. 
Lesson I learned? Pay very close attention to whether the H/H is likeable or at least relatable. And romance readers tend to consider cheating a deal breaker. No exceptions. That being said, I love writing damaged and flawed characters and redemption stories excite me, so I won't stop writing them just to please the few readers who won't see it through.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I have gotten beaten up by reviews in the past where there was cheating involved and the H/H wasn't likeable. It didn't matter that I redeemed the characters. Some people don't make it far enough to appreciate the redemption. If they don't like the character they stop reading and give you a lousy review.
> Lesson I learned? Pay very close attention to whether the H/H is likeable or at least relatable. And romance readers tend to consider cheating a deal breaker. No exceptions. That being said, I love writing damaged and flawed characters and redemption stories excite me, so I won't stop writing them just to please the few readers who won't see it through.


Someone doesn't seem to be able to differentiate between a book and a pair of glasses!


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

In romance, all the problems are the guy's fault, and only when he realizes that can the relationship be taken to the next level.

And in women's fiction...  um, I guess it's basically the same. 

Never mind.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

swolf said:


> In romance, all the problems are the guy's fault, and only when he realizes that can the relationship be taken to the next level.
> 
> And in women's fiction... um, I guess it's basically the same.
> 
> Never mind.


I know this is said as a joke (and it was a funny one, too), but there are plenty of romances where it's the woman who mainly has to change--or they both have to change equally. In my first book, the hero is basically--well, let's face it, he's perfect. All the change has to happen on the woman's side. In my next one, it's more the guy's issues. In the third one, they both have some. In the fourth one, it's more just circumstances that have to change.

But I agree. Somebody said that, in romance, women have to identify with the heroine and fall in love with the hero. I write very different characters, so this happens to various degrees with different people and different books, but to the extent that most people do both (identify/fall in love), they tend to like that book more, seems to me. It's all about how much you like/relate to the characters, at least in the kind of character-driven stuff I write (and I think most romance is character-driven).

And yes, I know cheating, or even sleeping with somebody else once the love interest is introduced (on the woman's part, not so much the guy's--though I've done both) is a no-go area. Because you're identifying again, and women don't want a cheater, don't want to take back a cheater. The point of romance is a guy who'll be faithful forever. (Which is NOT a fairy tale. There are great guys out there.)


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Thanks guys. You fill me with hope and trepidation all at once!

MC is engaged at the start. Cheats on him, not the hero. I did enough research to know cheating on the hero is a big no-no. I'm a newb, but not that much of a newb =p

I intentionally chose a cover that's a little different so readers would (hopefully) know my book is a little different. Maybe I need expert help with my branding from someone who is willing to read the book and check out my blurb and cover.

I like writing really flawed/damaged characters, and there were readers who responded to that. One of my unsolicited reviews praised the angst! I wonder how I could alter my blurb (altering my cover would obviously be more difficult/expensive) to attract those readers.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> My book was aimed at romance readers who are tired of the traditional predictable ending and wanted a story with a bit more to it than just the romance, although the romance plays a huge part and the book ends with a HEA. I managed to reach a few of these readers who loved the story, but a freebie advertising it as a romance gleaned some poor reviews from readers who were disappointed that it did not pan out in the usual traditional predictable ending .


This is exactly what I wanted to do. I read a fair amount of romance, and I felt like so many of the books were lacking something. I loved a lot of books, but I did NOT love the alpha heros. They're such zeros.

I wanted to write a romance with a little more meat. A little more literary.

Maybe we can figure it out together.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

What about romance where something happens that splinters their relationship and it ends, she ends up with another, first one stays in her life and she's torn between two men and has to choose in the end?


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

CrystalKay said:


> This is exactly what I wanted to do. I read a fair amount of romance, and I felt like so many of the books were lacking something. I loved a lot of books, but I did NOT love the alpha heros. They're such zeros.
> 
> I wanted to write a romance with a little more meat. A little more literary.
> 
> Maybe we can figure it out together.


The book is published - I just need to figure out how to reach the target readers


----------



## lyndahilburn (Apr 8, 2010)

This issue has been the biggest problem for my series. When I started writing it back in 2004, I didn't read a lot of romance, so I had no idea about the "rules." I intended my books to be about the main female character and her experiences. The first book had a love triangle in addition to the paranormal elements the series is really about. After it was published the first time, all the emails and feedback I got centered on readers being angry that I'd left the romance aspect open. She didn't choose one guy. Most of the bad reviews I got were because I didn't meet whatever the reader's romance expectations were. My books never fell clearly into one genre, or even a sub-genre. It's a paranormal with romance elements, mystery elements, sex, humor, horror elements. An urban fantasy with a cerebral (rather than physical) heroine. For a while I called it paranormal chick lit. Maybe it's paranormal women's fiction. 

If I had known how difficult all those genres would make selling my books, I probably would have gone more in the romance direction. Still, most of my readers are romance readers, even if they're unhappy with my choices. Since I have the chance (after the series books officially revert back to me) to brand them again, I'm hoping I can make the non-HEA more apparent, yet still draw people in with the romance elements. Whoever said romance sells better than women's fiction was right!


----------



## Cookie Monster (Apr 6, 2014)

CrystalKay said:


> MC is engaged at the start. Cheats on him, not the hero. I did enough research to know cheating on the hero is a big no-no. I'm a newb, but not that much of a newb =p


Many romance readers would have a problem with this type of cheating as well. I think many readers might react to that kind of cheating by finding the heroine unlikeable and not identifying with her. Likeability and identifying with the heroine are two of the keys to a successful romance novel. Not all romance novels have likeable heroines, but it makes it a much harder sell. I wouldn't be surprised if the cheating (whether she cheated with the hero or someone else) led the readers to say that your heroine doesn't deserve the hero, is a cheater, etc.

That's not saying that there's anything wrong with your book, but it's the reality of the romance market. If you want to have happy readers and sell a lot of books, a likeable heroine and no cheating would go a long way. If your heroine was tempted to cheat because of how attracted she is to the hero, but resists until she breaks off the engagement, then she comes out looking more likeable and more noble. You get the angst of the thwarted desire and the broken engagement without the turn-off of the cheating. That would probably play better with romance readers.

Of course you should tell the story you want to tell, but if the feedback from romance readers is consistently telling you that this book doesn't meet their expectations, maybe reclassifying the book as women's fic would be for the best? You might find your audience there.

I'd also add that romance novels can have rich plots and multidimensional characters. The audience has expectations, and writers have produced brilliant books that meet those expectations or break them without alienating their audience. Please don't undersell the incredible depth of talent among writers working in the romance genre. Some of the best writers out there write romance, because there's a large, hungry audience and a good living to be made. And romance readers are some of the best fans in the world--if they love your book, they'll tell their friends, write reviews, buy your upcoming books, and support you enthusiastically.


----------



## AssanaBanana (Feb 1, 2014)

CrystalKay said:


> Well, this is my interpretation of the comments/reviews, but...
> 
> A lot of readers didn't like the cheating.
> 
> ...


My romance novel has cheating, too. It also has a heroine who is flawed/damaged (she's the one doing the cheating, after all). There is a HFN, but not for all three of the characters - the "other man" doesn't get the girl in the end.

I had one editor I submitted it to reject it on the grounds that it "isn't enough of a romance" yet the publisher who DID pick it up didn't seem to mind, and categorized it as romantic suspense. In my case it definitely wouldn't fit under Women's Fiction due to the fact that 2/3 of it are written from a male POV, but I would still file it under romance. Reviews have been overall good, but one reviewer absolutely hated the cheating and the female main character, but loved the two male characters to death, particularly the one the woman was cheating WITH. I think it's an unfortunate double standard in romance that the women aren't allowed to have flaws that would be easily overlooked in a male character.

I think it's fine to categorize something as both romance and women's fiction, though. They are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

These things are often so difficult to talk about, not having read the book. I also say that those that read a lot of romance know it when they seez it so to speak. So trying to explain things to those that don't read the genre much is difficult. Especially if I keep reading comments like romance is Mills and Boons, has no literary merit and has no complex and deep characters and intricate plot lines. Again, anyone reading romance would know that all of that and more is in the romance genre already. There is no inventing with pushing the lines, that has been done for a long time. 

As to the cheating, I say it depends. Some romance readers will not accept any cheating of any kind. And I think about it this way. A romance has a HEA/HFN. A believable one at that. Now to me how believable is a HEA with characters that cheat. Does it matter that the cheating was not done to the hero/heroine? To me its about the character, what does it say about the character. And to those that say no cheating is covered in romance, try reading some older harlequins. They are all over the place there. Again, not new. 

For me again is has to be a believable ending. Believable in the context of the genre and in the context of the characters, their arc and the story itself. Motivation and most important to me is the grovel. One of the best grovels I have every read in a romance novel with cheating was Lady Gallant by Suzanne Robinson. 

Its not just about the theme, its about how skillfully it is done. Some writers can do it, others cannot. Believably. 

And if a novel is mostly about the heroines journey and doesn't really show her partner much, doesn't really show any grow in the relationship along the way, then those are womens fiction to me. I am not a fan of womens fiction, but I love romance. I downgrade rating a book if its sold as romance but ends up actually womens fiction. They are different genres to me.

In romance there has to be some constant awareness of the couple as a couple in some way, even if they are not together at the time, separated by some drama etc. I have to get the feel that they are going towards something, even apart. Its the journey. Anticipation.  If the hero/heroine only hooks up with someone at the very end of the book, its not really a romance. A tacked on HEA does not a romance make. Many books have HEA and it doesn't make them romance.  Switching the partner at the end, not really romance either. There was no going along with the journey in that case, how can one trust with a believable HEA in that case.

And by the way flawed and damaged characters are in pretty much all romances. To different degrees, but none of that is new. It would be boring for me to read about perfect characters only and I can't say I find that a lot in romance novels anyway. The only sugary saccharine romance books I can think of are maybe inspy ones or old fashioned "clean" ones. I don't see them much anywhere though. Its a term often used to describe romance by some authors that think they wrote such a unique and "different" kind of romance. Yet, I don't see them. Usually means those folks haven't actually read a lot of romance, if any and are just picking up the usual stereotypes from others. 

But cheating will always split the readers. Its not the only theme that splits romance readers. Ever read some of the threads around romance forums? We are quite open with our hates and loves.  . Cheating though is always a hot topic. I don't generally like it either as I have only found a handful of authors that were able to pull it of and still have a satisfying and believable ending. Without that, I will by an unhappy reader. Its just as simple as that.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Great post, Atunah. If you want to make a romance author OR reader mad, tell them you've written a romance that isn't like all those other romances, because it has 3D characters and a real storyline and more depth and more sophisticated writing. Unlike, you know, all those other romances. The ones they write/read/like. 

Romance is a great big tent. It covers lots and lots of reading preferences, levels of sophistication in plotlines and writing, heat levels, angst levels, "realism" levels, humor levels, you name it. And there's a market for pretty much all of it. There are lots of subgenres or authors in romance that I don't care to read. (My own tastes are pretty narrow, actually.) I don't really think there's such a thing as a "typical" romance reader. Lots of my readers are very educated women, professionals, etc. Others aren't. Some read almost exclusively romance. Others rarely read romance. A few are even (I hear) men!!! 

The trick is just signaling adequately to the reader via cover and blurb what your book will deliver, and if it will likely be to her taste--and then delivering on that promise.


----------



## StraightNoChaser (Dec 29, 2013)

Generally, if the story's main focus is the romantic relationship between the couple and it has an HFN/HEA, then it's a romance novel. Now whether or not it's a romance novel people will like is a different matter. Just because people don't like it doesn't make it women's lit.

If your characters are in the new adult age range, that might be a good place to categorize it. That subgenre is more tolerant of cheating, but you'll still piss off a good portion of readers. That's just the way it is.



Rosalind James said:


> If you want to make a romance author OR reader mad, tell them you've written a romance that isn't like all those other romances, because it has 3D characters and a real storyline and more depth and more sophisticated writing. Unlike, you know, all those other romances. The ones they write/read/like.


+1. That attitude rubbed me the wrong way, too. 

I wrote a romance novel where the heroine was cheating, well sort of. She was in a complicated open relationship and her boyfriend cheated a lot more. They hated him, obviously, but there were supposed to. She still got a little flack for it, but I think because she was being cheated on and it was NA erotic romance, readers were a little more forgiving. This characters had more than two dimensions btw and my favorite compliment that I saw multiple times was that they loved the story because it was "so different."

What you want to do can and has been done successfully. If you're looking to change your story at all based on reader feedback, I'd make the original boyfriend a cheater too, and make the characters between 18-24 if possible. If not, just publish it the way it is and accept that you'll get some very passionate negative reviews.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> Great post, Atunah. If you want to make a romance author OR reader mad, tell them you've written a romance that isn't like all those other romances, because it has 3D characters and a real storyline and more depth and more sophisticated writing. Unlike, you know, all those other romances. The ones they write/read/like.


You're misrepresenting what I said. But I don't really want to start a thing. I didn't mean to insult romance as a genre. There are lots of great books with great characters. There are also lots of just okay books with cookie-cutter characters. It's equally silly to suggest that romance doesn't suffer from tropes from time to time.

I admit, I am quite annoyed by people who offered to review my book and left a bad review because of the cheating. The blurb makes it clear it's a love triangle. I'm not sure if I need to spell out the cheating more in the blurb, or if I just picked a group that wasn't going to be receptive to a less cuddly book.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Not aimed at you so much, CrystalKay. It's more the direction these threads tend to go. A trap we all tend to fall into, I think--"Well, I'm not writing that erotica/erotic romance/romance/genre fiction, so people actually have to think to read my books," or whatever. 

(Not saying you did this. But just that that's where this always seems to head.)

I think all genres have cookie-cutter stuff. Thrillers--my favorites? You betcha. Many are not very good. Some are outstanding. Even though they all tend to follow similar formulas.

As mentioned above, cheating is a big deal. I know I have reviewers who go to pains to point out that whatever you might think from the hero or heroine's situation, there is NO CHEATING in this book, as that is a major turnoff for them. You can write anything you want, of course you can, it's just good to be aware that some people are going to hate that you went there.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

With Romance the deal-breaker is a happily ever after AND the main focus of the book should be the couple reaching said happily ever after. With women's fiction, the main focus of the story generally has to do with the woman's personal growth. Sometimes she gets the guy, but sometimes she realizes she's better off on her own, and sometimes guys don't even figure into it at all.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CrystalKay said:


> Well, this is my interpretation of the comments/reviews, but...
> 
> A lot of readers didn't like the cheating.
> 
> ...


Generally speaking, cheating is a no-go for Romance. That right there will almost always put a book into women's fic or general fiction. It's damned hard to root for a couple to stay together when one or the other of them is cheating. Usually you just want the cheatee to kick the cheater to the curb and find someone who'll treat them right ;-)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I think it's important to keep in mind that with Romance, you're selling / creating a couple falling in love. Those early days when all you can do is think about the other person, you're driving your friends nuts talking about him, you're reminiscing about the last date, fantasizing about the next date, etc. It's hard to do that when there's a triangle. Is the guy really The One if you're dithering between him another guy? You're selling the magic here, and that magic doesn't cheat, doesn't stray, doesn't fail to stand up for their partner. Flaws are okay and they may not be instantly in love, but you need to convince the reader that this is going to be a love that's going to stick. That, to me, is at the core of any Romance, regardless the sub-genre.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

CrystalKay said:


> MC is engaged at the start. Cheats on him, not the hero. I did enough research to know cheating on the hero is a big no-no. I'm a newb, but not that much of a newb =p


Okay, now I get it. Romance doesn't particularly lend itself to love triangles, which is not to say it can't be done. I'm calling my love triangle women's fiction (which it is, but it also has a central love story and an HEA) to fend off the people who have strict preferences with regard to the romance conventions. (And none of my characters cheat, or even come close to cheating. Some readers will hate the main character for even being _attracted _to someone she shouldn't.)

One key is to make sure readers understand early on that the fiance is NOT the hero. Make sure they want her to dump him and end up with the actual hero. Show the heroine feeling torn up inside about the cheating.

If you've done that, and some readers still don't like it, then the book isn't for them. Just make sure in the blurb that it's clear she betrays her fiance, to warn them away.

Romance novels are comfort food. Some people will love it if you top their mac 'n' cheese with jalapeno peppers, and some people won't. Warn them about the jalapeno peppers so they can make an informed choice.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> Okay, now I get it. Romance doesn't particularly lend itself to love triangles, which is not to say it can't be done. I'm calling my love triangle women's fiction (which it is, but it also has a central love story and an HEA) to fend off the people who have strict preferences with regard to the romance conventions. (And none of my characters cheat, or even come close to cheating. Some readers will hate the main character for even being _attracted _to someone she shouldn't.)
> 
> One key is to make sure readers understand early on that the fiance is NOT the hero. Make sure they want her to dump him and end up with the actual hero. Show the heroine feeling torn up inside about the cheating.
> 
> ...


Hmm. That totally boggles my mind because I am freaking gaga for love triangles. I must have some kind of confirmation bias.

I like the peppers idea. I know I like my books with more bite.

The comfort food thing is something I see a lot. I don't know how true it is, but it seems to be the prevailing logic. It concerns me that the kind of stuff I want to write will never been comforting enough to be popular, but it is what it is. I've only been publishing a month, so it's pretty hard to say. I don't really know what would be good or bad sales at this stage in the game.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

Romance is a HUGE genre. Some people LOVE love triangles. If that's your niche, you will find an audience. It's all about customer expectations.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> Romance is a HUGE genre. Some people LOVE love triangles. If that's your niche, you will find an audience. It's all about customer expectations.


I hope so!

The lack of juicy, juicy love triangles (I'm sure they're out there, but they're not as easy to find as billionaires *sigh*), was a huge part of my motivation to write this series.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

I ask again. If you have a 3-book novel series (each one around 60-80k) where the heroine leaves the hero, gets with someone else but comes back, will people ultimately consider that a no-no? 

Like in book 1 you build the relationship. 

Then in book 2 he does something completely unforgivable and just cannot be with him anymore. 

Then in book 3 a new suitor (who has been around since book 1) arrives and she decides to start going with him. But dammit book 1 and 2 guy is back because he knows he was wrong but he just can't let her go and eventually she has to choose between them and of course she goes with book 1 guy. 

Would that be acceptable? Would it have to be easy on new suitor for people to really accept it? Like he takes it all in stride and moves on instead of being destroyed?


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> Great post, Atunah. If you want to make a romance author OR reader mad, tell them you've written a romance that isn't like all those other romances, because it has 3D characters and a real storyline and more depth and more sophisticated writing. Unlike, you know, all those other romances. The ones they write/read/like.
> 
> Romance is a great big tent. It covers lots and lots of reading preferences, levels of sophistication in plotlines and writing, heat levels, angst levels, "realism" levels, humor levels, you name it. And there's a market for pretty much all of it. There are lots of subgenres or authors in romance that I don't care to read. (My own tastes are pretty narrow, actually.) I don't really think there's such a thing as a "typical" romance reader. Lots of my readers are very educated women, professionals, etc. Others aren't. Some read almost exclusively romance. Others rarely read romance. A few are even (I hear) men!!!
> 
> The trick is just signaling adequately to the reader via cover and blurb what your book will deliver, and if it will likely be to her taste--and then delivering on that promise.


Rosalind and Atunah nailed it. (Anyone interested in writing romance should take Atunah's post and STUDY IT ) I was reading through this thread, hoping someone would make the point that if you think you're writing a romance that bends genre boundaries because of some deficiency or shallowness in the genre, then I guarantee you don't have a good understanding of the genre. And by that I mean a more than stereotypical understanding of the genre.

Romance is huge, and is NOT synonymous with "what's popular now," any more than all fantasy is just like Harry Potter. I think that's the mistake people make, reading too narrowly in the genre by picking up what's on the best seller lists now (aka the angsty, alpha, billionaires + virginal twenty somethings) as assuming that represents the genre as a whole.

As far as love triangles.... I think the safest route is that it's fair to have two love interests, but this trope works best when it's clear there's one true hero that, though they might resist it, the heroine can't really live without, and vice versa.

J Ryan, I've read trilogies that follow that pattern and I don't think they're particularly genre bending/taboo/frowned upon. Again, what's important in your scenario is showing that it's the first guy that we're pulling for, that the heroine really wants/needs, and who is truly right for her. The more ambivalent we feel, the more you lose the essence of romance as a genre: two people who really belong together overcoming internal and external obstacles to be together. If your heroine REALLY can't decide who she wants to be with (as in, the reader really doubts where things will end up), the story becomes less about two people and more about one (rather indecisive) heroine - which IMO does fall more into the realm of women's fiction.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I wish Amazon had a chick-lit category. It's more of a British category, but lots of American work falls more into this. I think of it as women's fiction with humor, and I greatly prefer it to women's fiction, personally.

Chick lit is rife with love triangles and outright cheating. Two of my own very favorite books of this type: Sarah Bird's "The Boyfriend School" (Sarah Bird is definitely a literary writer) and Harriet Evans's "A Hopeless Romantic." In the latter, the heroine is outright cheating at the beginning, in the least defensible way. Her life basically comes crashing down. The second half of the book has a very enjoyable romance, but the book's definitely chick lit. 

Emily Giffen, who sells a bazillion books--her books always seem to revolve around, yep, cheating. They're a bridge too far for me personally, because she makes the cheating OK and even sympathetic, by making the cheated-on be either cheating themselves or completely unlikeable, and thus tells us it's fine & dandy for our hero/heroine to be cheating despite the months of dishonesty and sneaking around and--ugh. I hate it, leaves a very bad taste in my mouth, but take a look at her sales! Loads of readers LOVE her.

Or how about Bridget Jones's Diary? That sold a few books. Love triangle par excellence. (We knew which guy we wanted her to end up with, though.)

So that goes to show you--whether you call Giffen's books romance, chick lit, or women's fiction--there's a market. I think if you write a compelling-enough story and get it out there into the world enough for readers to find it, you can succeed whatever your niche. Best of luck!


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

J Ryan said:


> I ask again. If you have a 3-book novel series (each one around 60-80k) where the heroine leaves the hero, gets with someone else but comes back, will people ultimately consider that a no-no?
> 
> Like in book 1 you build the relationship.
> 
> ...


The part I bolded is a deal breaker. I am not going to believe a happily ever after if he can do the unforgivable.

This scenario only worked in Twilight because in book 2 the hero left because *he felt unworthy of the heroine*. He said he was leaving forever, so she tried to move on. But at the end of book 2 one of his relatives appeals to the heroine to save the hero's life. Book 2 ends with a happy for now, as all the Twilight books end.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> I ask again. If you have a 3-book novel series (each one around 60-80k) where the heroine leaves the hero, gets with someone else but comes back, will people ultimately consider that a no-no?
> 
> Like in book 1 you build the relationship.
> 
> ...


I'd be interested in that, but I am especially find of books that challenge me and my expectations.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> I ask again. If you have a 3-book novel series (each one around 60-80k) where the heroine leaves the hero, gets with someone else but comes back, will people ultimately consider that a no-no?
> 
> Like in book 1 you build the relationship.
> 
> ...


I would not classify this as Romance--you will get hammered. Actually the "unforgivable" thing he does is less of a deal-breaker for me (and most Romance readers, I suspect) than the fact that you've got your HEA stretched across three books.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I wish I could like so many posts in this thread. A lot of them I don't have anything to add so don't comment, but there are some great ones 

I wouldn't classify Twilight as Romance. I'd classify it as YA paranormal with a strong romantic element, but that's just me.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Ah, great points above about the "unforgivable" thing. What he does must be forgivable, of course, in the end. See Atunah's post above about the grovel/change/making that HEA or HFN believable. 

As far as stretching the HEA/HFN over several books... I think we're seeing this more frequently, particularly among New Adult trilogies, which often end with cliffhangers. You will make some readers angry, but those types of books also burn up the charts, so, make of that what you will! 

(ETA Side Rant: This is why it drives me absolutely batty that people think romance is so easy to write, or so simplistic. You have to nail plot AND nuances of character change/motivation for it to work. You have to be aware of reader expectations, which are often exacting. You have to be able to write sexy, not just sex. And you have to work in a market so large and diverse and yet so structured that your idea has definitely been done before, and done well. You have to manage originality within boundaries of genre. Writing romance is so much fun - but it's also a challenge that's very rewarding. If you can do it, you get readers like Atunah and often, good sales.)


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

DianaGabriel said:


> Ah, great points above about the "unforgivable" thing. What he does must be forgivable, of course, in the end. See Atunah's post above about the grovel/change/making that HEA or HFN believable.
> 
> As far as stretching the HEA/HFN over several books... I think we're seeing this more frequently, particularly among New Adult trilogies, which often end with cliffhangers. You will make some readers angry, but those types of books also burn up the charts, so, make of that what you will!
> 
> (ETA Side Rant: This is why it drives me absolutely batty that people think romance is so easy to write, or so simplistic. You have to nail plot AND nuances of character change/motivation for it to work. You have to be aware of reader expectations, which are often exacting. You have to be able to write sexy, not just sex. And you have to work in a market so large and diverse and yet so structured that your idea has definitely been done before, and done well. You have to manage originality within boundaries of genre. Writing romance is so much fun - but it's also a challenge that's very rewarding. If you can do it, you get readers like Atunah and often, good sales.)


On the other hand, you don't have to corner the whole huge market. You just have to satisfy the niche of that huge market that likes your own spin on "romance," wherever you fall on all the many spectra of heat, humor, angst, conflict, asshatliness of hero, age ... etc.! I just wrote the kind of book I liked to read, because it was hard for me to find. I wrote it for myself. Still do.

But--I'll add this, and I think it's really important--I LIKE ROMANCE. I love a HEA. I love a sexy, strong, manly, GOOD man. I love reading about women realizing they're stronger than they thought, and that they can overcome their doubts and fears and become their best selves. I love reading about couples finding their way together, discovering that they can bring the best parts of themselves to a relationship, reveal their weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and feed what is strongest in themselves. And I love to laugh. So I love romance, and I believe in it, too. I believe it's real, it's possible, and it lasts. I do think that helps. I believe in what I'm writing.

However you define loving romance--whatever "a good romance" is to you--I think, at a minimum, you should love it. You should have read it, if not now, at least in the past--because you love it when it's done the way you like it. I think that greatly increases the likelihood of your succeeding at writing it.

I'm sure there are more professional/cynical/call-it-what-you-will folks out there who can write it without loving it. But I'd be willing to bet it's easier if you love it.

(None of the above is meant as any suggestion that others in this thread do not love romance or are entering into the genre for cynical reasons. Just a general remark to anybody who's reading, my own personal opinion.)


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

It's very challenging. The worst part is definitely the reactions I get from people offline who look at me like I'm an idiot when I tell them I write romance.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

CrystalKay said:


> It's very challenging. The worst part is definitely the reactions I get from people offline who look at me like I'm an idiot when I tell them I write romance.


Being able to remodel your kitchen eases that sting a LOT. I spent decades being an advanced-degree professional blah blah. Now I get to do what I love. If they don't get it, too darn bad.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Unforgivable was too strong of a word. Basically he does something she has trouble getting over and leaves him. It's not unforgivable, but it's a deal-breaker for her at the time. 
Curse my word choice.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

What's wrong with stretching the HEA over 3 books if it's a series starring the same characters? If you do the HEA in book one then what's left for books 2 and 3?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

J Ryan said:


> What's wrong with stretching the HEA over 3 books if it's a series starring the same characters? If you do the HEA in book one then what's left for books 2 and 3?


Exactly, and for this reason, stretching the Happily Ever After out over multiple books is common right now, at least in paranormal romance it is. There need to be loose strings that draw the reader into the next book, too.

But each book should end with a Happy For Now.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Well I do write PNR. But I feel like Book 2 won't be happy for now, but I'm going to chance it anyway so I can write the story I want.


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

Women's Fiction: I really enjoyed Emily Giffin's Something Borrowed/Something Blue that Rosalind mentioned.  But I went in warily because from the blurbs I knew it would be a tough sell for me.  In the end, I felt like she put just enough of 'these people MUST be together' in Borrowed, and just enough of the 'heroine changing from a complete asshat into a human being' in Blue.  But I can't think of any other books I've read where cheating worked for me as a reader.

For Romance: Regarding love triangles, my all-time favorites are Judith McNaught's 'Perfect' and 'Paradise'.  *Swoon* does that lady know how to write an amazingly engaging love story with a triangle where the guy not picked isn't a jerk.  So so so good.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> Being able to remodel your kitchen eases that sting a LOT. I spent decades being an advanced-degree professional blah blah. Now I get to do what I love. If they don't get it, too darn bad.


Oh man. I live in LA. I'd have to be super successful just to buy a house here. That would be sweet!

I had one friend who kept calling my book porn. Then, he sat me down and told me to WRITE A REAL BOOK. I am no longer friends with him!

The uncertainty is really difficult for me. I don't know how to know if a larger audience will like my work. If I am "commercial" enough. It's hard to motivate myself to commit to writing two series when I see negative reviews or low sales.

But I really can't imagine a happy future where I'm not writing. Hopefully, I'll have a better idea of what my readers like and don't like for my second series. I certainly know a lot of things they didn't like about this book. A lot.

Marketing is a whole other difficult issue as well!

sidenote: Could any of you reccomend some contemporary, NA, or erotic romance trilogies that are at least moderately popular?


----------



## Jennifer Lewis (Dec 12, 2013)

CrystalKay said:


> sidenote: Could any of you reccomend some contemporary, NA, or erotic romance trilogies that are at least moderately popular?


Uh, 50 Shades of Grey? 

I just went to Amazon and searched on Romance Trilogies, then sorted by "new and popular" and here they are:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_st_popularity-rank?keywords=romance+trilogy+series&qid=1410554091&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Aromance+trilogy+series&sort=popularity-rank


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> What's wrong with stretching the HEA over 3 books if it's a series starring the same characters? If you do the HEA in book one then what's left for books 2 and 3?


As Rosalind and others have put it, you can do just about anything you want and you'll probably find a niche of readers who love what you're doing. For me, however, I will maintain that the thrust of a Romance novel is a couple's journey to their Happily Ever After. The conflict and the setting / world will define the subgenre, but regardless, the main thrust of a Romance is the relationship. The journey of a couple to find each other and to get their HEA. If you're stretching that out over three books, is the RELATIONSHIP the main focus? I'm going to say probably not, because what the heck are they doing for 275k words that they aren't getting together?



Cherise Kelley said:


> Exactly, and for this reason, stretching the Happily Ever After out over multiple books is common right now, at least in paranormal romance it is. There need to be loose strings that draw the reader into the next book, too.


Not to be argumentative, but please give an example of a Paranormal Romance that features the same couple where the HEA is stretched out over multiple books. That sounds like Urban Fantasy (subgenre Urban Fantasy Romance--Kate Daniels as an example). While the two subgenres are similar and often share the same audience, they aren't the same and have different requirements.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Jennifer Lewis said:


> Uh, 50 Shades of Grey?
> 
> I just went to Amazon and searched on Romance Trilogies, then sorted by "new and popular" and here they are:
> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_st_popularity-rank?keywords=romance+trilogy+series&qid=1410554091&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3Aromance+trilogy+series&sort=popularity-rank


It's easy to find popular. What I'd like to see is popular and... good.

I haven't brought myself to read 50 Shades yet, but I haven't heard good things.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> But--I'll add this, and I think it's really important--I LIKE ROMANCE. I love a HEA. I love a sexy, strong, manly, GOOD man. I love reading about women realizing they're stronger than they thought, and that they can overcome their doubts and fears and become their best selves. I love reading about couples finding their way together, discovering that they can bring the best parts of themselves to a relationship, reveal their weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and feed what is strongest in themselves. And I love to laugh. So I love romance, and I believe in it, too. I believe it's real, it's possible, and it lasts. I do think that helps. I believe in what I'm writing.
> 
> However you define loving romance--whatever "a good romance" is to you--I think, at a minimum, you should love it. You should have read it, if not now, at least in the past--because you love it when it's done the way you like it. I think that greatly increases the likelihood of your succeeding at writing it.


I love you so hard right now 

As a side note to my above comments--there are millions of readers of Romance. We come from all walks of life, various backgrounds, educations, cultures, and circumstances. We don't all like the same things. Do what you love and try to connect with an audience that your stuff resonates with


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

ETA: Ninja'd by Anne, who said it far more simply and sweetly than I ever could have. 

So true, and really well said, Rosalind. I feel the same way. (And I agree, it would be impossible to try and corner the whole romance market.) I'm sure there are people who write romance without LOVING it, but I think there is some correlation between the best, most passionate/memorable romances and whether their writers love writing and reading romance, too. 

Crystal, some people on this board have had great success writing in a niche within a popular genre. It sounds like the type of book you wrote doesn't quite fit within mainstream contemporary romance. And there have been lots of good suggestions here about the distinction between women's fiction and romance. If you're writing (non-menage) romance, the focus is always on a couple - so if you want to veer more towards romance, that's the way to do it. But the thing about contemporary romance is that even within that genre, authors have their niche. (Rosalind's, for example, is New Zealand and rugby.) What are you bringing to the table that's fresh or different? That might be a good way to build your brand of women's fiction or romance. 

For your next series, maybe focus on what readers DID like about your first work(s) and then consider a) how to repeat that and b) how to reach the readers who want what you write. Chasing after readers who are looking for something other than what you can or want to deliver can be a recipe for frustration. On the other hand, it's fair to want to tailor your work to genres that are more lucrative... The key is maintaining what's unique and likeable about your take (as long as your "take" isn't something like, "realism" or "complexity" or something else that only betrays a lack of knowledge about the genre) -- because those are the things that will keep you excited about your own work!

You could read what's popular in contemporary romance now, but seriously -- recent trends comprise only a small portion of the genre. There's no point trying to write angsty new adult alpha billionaire romance if that's not what you want to do. (Unless you really do want to write for money only, which is fair. Just not the vibe I'm getting from this thread.) Plus, trends change.


----------



## Capella (Jan 16, 2014)

CrystalKay said:


> It's easy to find popular. What I'd like to see is popular and... good.
> 
> I haven't brought myself to read 50 Shades yet, but I haven't heard good things.


And...good? What do you define as good? There is no 'good' style of writing that applies across all genres, and that's what I've learned most as a writer. I now realize stuff I used to turn my nose up at is so much harder to execute than I thought. I don't criticize other authors now. Just because I like a certain kind of writing or storytelling doesn't mean it's the best. 
You can put your book wherever you want as long as you are willing to take the reviews. The expectation right now in the bestseller lists is different than it has been in other years. The writing is taking a backseat to the story, and readers love that. There's nothing wrong with that. Then again, there are also amazing writers doing both. But I can't tell you how many times someone tells me they are writing something totally new and unlike the other romances, and it's totally been done a ton of times, but they haven't read the genre enough to know that. That's why it's important to read widely, or not make assumptions.
You might want to visit a blog like Dearauthor. She likes the more literary romance and she and her friends are quite educated and articulate (though I don't always agree with her at all). If you are looking for proof that complexity and literary writing exists in the romance world, you'll find it there. 
As for cheating, I've seen it done in books before. It's how it's done that matters. And dark and angsty is in right now in romance. I mean really dark. If you look at maryse.net and some of her recent recs you'll get what I mean.

To Atunah! Thank you thank you thank you. I couldn't have said it better as a romance reader or writer. It warms my heart to have someone like you speaking up for us with such a well written response.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

You don't have to confine yourself, either. I started out with NZ rugby, but within 6 months I was writing completely different things as well (US-based, nothing to do with sports.) That has done quite well. And I'm now writing a romantic suspense series set in Idaho, for Montlake. 

There are differences in tone between the series, but my voice and some basic stuff about the kinds of people and relationships I write remain the same, and I've had pretty good crossover between the different series so far.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> As Rosalind and others have put it, you can do just about anything you want and you'll probably find a niche of readers who love what you're doing. For me, however, I will maintain that the thrust of a Romance novel is a couple's journey to their Happily Ever After. The conflict and the setting / world will define the subgenre, but regardless, the main thrust of a Romance is the relationship. The journey of a couple to find each other and to get their HEA. If you're stretching that out over three books, is the RELATIONSHIP the main focus? I'm going to say probably not, because what the heck are they doing for 275k words that they aren't getting together?


Living every day life? Having various conflicts that they have to attend to? You know stuff most people do in fiction. Mine is a PNR by the way. And it's actually only be about 180-220k words for the three book series in my instance.

Are you trying to tell me that every romance can't be a series and has to be a stand alone book?


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Capella,

Certainly. What I mean is that I can easily sort by top 100 on Amazon. I'd be more interested in the suggestions of writers here, of trilogies they really enjoyed. That they thought were good. You know, like if your BFF said she wanted to start reading romance and wanted you to recommend your favorite trilogy.

(If that's 50 Shades, more power to you. But I can't take any more BDSM billionaires).

I do feel like this attempt was a lot more "literary" than what I see as the average contemporary romance. Not literary as in good but as in literary fiction--a little more thinky/introspective.

My problem is that I don't really know how to brand myself as what readers will like. A lot of my positive reviews praise more amorphous things like the character development or the themes. Except for angst. I have that, lol!

Rosalind,

So true! I love getting swept up in a great romance. I love getting lost in books, period, but a great romance is especially fun. I'm always shipping characters in non-romance books and TV shows.


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

I think people on here are trying to help you, and answer your question directly.  And the answer to your question is that for romance, there must be a HFN or HEA at the end of every single book.  It does not matter if the romance is part of a series or not.  I am writing a 7-part romance series, all full length novels, all inter-related, but there will be a HEA at the end of every single book.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

SarahWritesSometimes said:


> I think people on here are trying to help you, and answer your question directly. And the answer to your question is that for romance, there must be a HFN or HEA at the end of every single book. It does not matter if the romance is part of a series or not. I am writing a 7-part romance series, all full length novels, all inter-related, but there will be a HEA at the end of every single book.


Sorry, I don't know if this is the case. Look at people like Annie Jacobie who have had great success with putting cliffhangers at the end of their books. Look at the profusion of serialized fiction! Deborah Blandon, etc. Did this decision p*ss off some readers -- of course -- but are they selling? Well, yes. So I don't know if you can assert that there needs to be an HFN at the end of every book/installment to fall into the romance genre.

And I mean, if you wanna get real, what's the biggest selling romance ever? Hate it or love it it's Fifty Shades of Grey. Did the first book end with a HFN? No. Actually, just the opposite. The couple was in total splits-ville if I remember correctly.

Now, whether not ending with a HFN is a good business strategy or not, is a different discussion, but I think you can't argue that the cliffhanger ending in romance is here to stay and a valuable tool for some.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> Living every day life? Having various conflicts that they have to attend to? You know stuff most people do in fiction. Mine is a PNR by the way. And it's actually only be about 180-220k words for the three book series in my instance.
> 
> Are you trying to tell me that every romance can't be a series and has to be a stand alone book?


Yes and no. You can have a Romance be part of a series, but generally each book needs to be self-contained. For what it's worth, there's a difference between series plot and book plot, and you'll often see each book in, say, PNR be part of a series plot. Yes, readers want the next book in the series but the next book in the series is a new couple, and their HEA is achieved within their book. Now, if you want to find out what happens in the series plot, you need to get the next book in the series.

That said, you're welcome to do whatever you like, but don't be surprised if you get push-back from readers complaining about lack of a HEA, cliffhangers, etc.

Also, if the plot is such that everyday life and various conflicts outside of what's keeping the couple apart, is the MAIN PLOT really about the relationship? I'm not trying to be argumentative here or tell you what you can or can't do, but I'm asking you to take a critical look at your manuscript. You can do whatever you like, but the critical, nonnegotiable point of a Romance is that the main plot centers around the couple and their journey to a "an emotionally satisfying resolution."


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> Sorry, I don't know if this is the case.


I'm willing to admit I could be wrong. I'm just going on what I have read and loved in romance novels. I did read 50 Shades, but all at once after they were all published so I honestly can't remember how the individual books ended, I just remember the general story.

I definitely do not have all the answers, and I have never sold a single book. I just know what I like, and what I expect when I read a romance novel. If I suspect (or am told explicitly) that a romance will conclude after 3 books for example, then I will wait until I can read all 3 one after the other. I'm impatient that way.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I'll start by saying I haven't read 50 Shades, Ms. Jacoby, or Ms. Blandon. From the blurbs on Amazon, though and what I've read on GR, etc. one could argue that those books fall under Erotic Romance, which is a slightly different genre. And as I and others have pointed out, there's a HUGE variety of Romance readers out there. But people aren't just pulling this out of our nether regions. Main focus on the relationship and the emotionally satisfying ending are a staple of the genre. And yes, you can deviate, and yes, if you find your audience they'll love you for it. But how well a book sells or doesn't sell doesn't mean that the genre is changing.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Anne Victory said:


> Yes and no. You can have a Romance be part of a series, but generally each book needs to be self-contained. For what it's worth, there's a difference between series plot and book plot, and you'll often see each book in, say, PNR be part of a series plot. Yes, readers want the next book in the series but the next book in the series is a new couple, and their HEA is achieved within their book. Now, if you want to find out what happens in the series plot, you need to get the next book in the series.
> 
> That said, you're welcome to do whatever you like, but don't be surprised if you get push-back from readers complaining about lack of a HEA, cliffhangers, etc.
> 
> Also, if the plot is such that everyday life and various conflicts outside of what's keeping the couple apart, is the MAIN PLOT really about the relationship? I'm not trying to be argumentative here or tell you what you can or can't do, but I'm asking you to take a critical look at your manuscript. You can do whatever you like, but the critical, nonnegotiable point of a Romance is that the main plot centers around the couple and their journey to a "an emotionally satisfying resolution."


Yep, totally agree with Anne here and her other post.

I won't touch serials with a 10 foot pole myself and I don't consider them romance. I don't really care where they are shelved on amazon categories to be honest. For me it has made casual browsing almost impossible with all these non romances and chapter books there. If I happen to read one that wasn't marked as a incomplete book and there is no HEA/HFN and its marked as romance, I give it an automatic 1-2 star ratings and/or review.

You guys can do what you want, but don't come back later and whine about all the bad reviews if you stick something in romance that isn't. Its as simple as that. It is what it is. Readers will make their dislike for something known just as much as the likes. 
I don't even consider 50 shades a romance. Others might. Twilight I don't consider romance either, but young adult.

Whats interesting to me is when I hang out with other romance readers on other forums, blogs and such and we share what we read, whats coming up new etc, almost never are serials mentioned or discussed, or romances with no HEA. There are also only a few of the top selling books in amazon under romance discussed for some reason. I contribute this to maybe partially the fact that many that read those serials and such didn't come to those books from reading romance, but other fiction or not much fiction at all. And from fan fic sites. That has been my experience.

And that is why what was said earlier is very true. The amazon kindle best seller in romance is not a good representation of the romance genre as a whole.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

CrystalKay said:


> Capella,
> 
> Certainly. What I mean is that I can easily sort by top 100 on Amazon. I'd be more interested in the suggestions of writers here, of trilogies they really enjoyed. That they thought were good. You know, like if your BFF said she wanted to start reading romance and wanted you to recommend your favorite trilogy.
> 
> (If that's 50 Shades, more power to you. But I can't take any more BDSM billionaires).


I love YA paranormal romance! Here are the first books of some of my favorite series. 

 (4 books)

 (6 books)

 (Trilogy)

 (4 books)

I agree that YA romance is different from adult romance. I like YA romance better because the focus is on emotions, rather than on sex. In all of these, the relationship is front and center, but there are obstacles, mostly coming-of-age issues. YA paranormal romance is extra different because the obstacles to the relationship are so fanciful. I find paranormal romance really fun!

And I don't know about Brenda Pandos, but the other three authors in my samples are all KBoards members.  None of them are clients of mine.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> If you have a 3-book novel series (each one around 60-80k) where the heroine leaves the hero, gets with someone else but comes back, will people ultimately consider that a no-no?
> 
> Like in book 1 you build the relationship.
> 
> ...


You can write whatever you want. The question is how you market it. Book 2 as you describe it is not a standalone romance, because there's no HEA or HFN. It simply doesn't meet the definition of romance. If you call the series a romance trilogy, so it's clear it's a single story spread across three books, you might be able to get away with it. You will also have some very p*ssed off readers. Unavoidable.

The great thing about writing fiction is that there are no rules. There's a reader for every kind of story. The challenge is finding the people who are your targeted readers and avoiding the ones who aren't. People call genre-bending books romance because it's a lucrative market. The downside is the blow-back you'll get from dissatisfied customers. You have to walk a tightrope, but it can be done successfully.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Atunah said:


> And that is why what was said earlier is very true. The amazon kindle best seller in romance is not a good representation of the romance genre as a whole.


Well at the moment the top-sellers in kindle is what I /want/ to be. I'm not going to be selling a ton of paperbacks in the future. I get where you guys are coming form in terms of a HFN at the end of the book. I do. In fact, that's probably what I prefer to read. But if I take a look at what's selling, and the kind of book I like to write. Well then, I get a different picture. And I think to somehow say that if you're writing a serial or don't have a HFN/HEA ending you're not romance feels like it's not taking an accurate look at where the genre is now. *shrugs*

I'm not saying there won't be/isn't push-back for these changes, but you can't argue that they're happening and some people enjoy it. A lot of people actually.

I suppose the moral of the story is write what you want to write, but be aware of challenges you might incur by going the serial/non HFN ending route. As always, with everything, it's a matter of finding your audience. But I do think the audience for serial/cliffhangers/delayedHEA is a lot bigger than some are making it out to be.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Cherise Kelley said:


> I love YA paranormal romance! Here are the first books of some of my favorite series.


The Talisman series should probably be categorized as YA Paranormal / Urban Fantasy.
Peachville High--YA Paranormal
Zellie Wells--YA Paranormal
Clockwiser--YA Paranormal / Time Travel

None of those are what I'd call Romances. Any genre can have a love story. The presence or absence of a love story is not what defines the genre.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> Well at the moment the top-sellers in kindle is what I /want/ to be. I'm not going to be selling a ton of paperbacks in the future. I get where you guys are coming form in terms of a HFN at the end of the book. I do. In fact, that's probably what I prefer to read. But if I take a look at what's selling, and the kind of book I like to write. Well then, I get a different picture. And I think to somehow say that if you're writing a serial or don't have a HFN/HEA ending you're not romance feels like it's not taking an accurate look at where the genre is now. *shrugs*
> 
> I'm not saying there won't be/isn't push-back for these changes, but you can't argue that they're happening and some people enjoy it. A lot of people actually.
> 
> I suppose the moral of the story is write what you want to write, but be aware of challenges you might incur by going the serial/non HFN ending route. As always, with everything, it's a matter of finding your audience. But I do think the audience for serial/cliffhangers/delayedHEA is a lot bigger than some are making it out to be.


Not sure what paperbacks have to do with it. I read ebooks, but its just a different medium, paper or ebook, its the same book.

I am not saying those serials and non HEA books are not selling. Of course they are. I am not saying people don't love them, they do. But none of that makes them romance. Just because something is stuck into romance on Amazon by the author, doesn't make it romance. It doesn't mean the genre is suddenly changing away from the one thing that defines it, HEA. If you stick a thriller into sci fi, it doesn't mean the sci fi genre suddenly must change.

There is only one genre that is defined by a HEA/HFN. One. Why do people always insist that that one thing, that genre needs to be taken away for some reason. Why. Plenty other genres out there and I don't see anyone trying to consistently change those. It is what it is. Romance genre is HEA/HFN. Period. Its not the only genre I read by the way, but when I read romance, that is what I get, because that is what it is.

But like I said, have at it. Us readers will make our voices heard.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

lala said:


> But it has to. Romance is going to change to fit the times & the people reading it. Whether that means serials vs novels or HEA with cliffhangers, "romance" is going to change as the people reading it change. Right now, I think we have two different main camps in romance. The "younger" generation (and I use that term loosely) seem to be ok with serials, cliffhangers, and breaking the "rules" of the genre but that that won't fly with people who started reading romance in the 90's or earlier. I don't think one is better than the other just different. The genre can't stay exactly the same & sticking to tired "rules." That's one of the nice things about being indie. You can take a chance & break "rules." One of the best selling PNR series right now has a lot of crappy reviews b/c the H "cheats" on the h. Doesn't stop some ppl from picking it up & leaving great reviews.


No. That's like saying that for a book to be fantasy it doesn't have to have magic or fantastical creatures or some aspect of Fantasy, or that a mystery doesn't have to have the solve the murder. And look--there are ONLY two rules of Romance. They aren't complicated. That is
1) That THE central plot is the relationship and the couple coming together
2) The there is an emotionally satisfying ending (aka the happily ever after / happily for now)

All this other stuff--no cheating, no triangles, no this or that--those aren't rules. Those are things that different readers prefer or don't prefer. There are only two rules in Romance; everything else is negotiable. But to say that you want to change one of those two rules means that either a) you don't know the genre or b) you don't respect the genre. Don't want a HEA? Fine. Don't write a HEA. But please don't call it Romance and then say that the genre has to has to change with the times.

EDIT: Ninja'd by Atunah. Apparently great minds think alike ;-)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> I'm not saying there won't be/isn't push-back for these changes, but you can't argue that they're happening and some people enjoy it. A lot of people actually.
> 
> I suppose the moral of the story is write what you want to write, but be aware of challenges you might incur by going the serial/non HFN ending route. As always, with everything, it's a matter of finding your audience. But I do think the audience for serial/cliffhangers/delayedHEA is a lot bigger than some are making it out to be.


A more accurate thing would be to say that Erotic Romance is gaining popularity, not that the Romance genre is changing. My two cents.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Anne Victory said:


> No. That's like saying that for a book to be fantasy it doesn't have to have magic or fantastical creatures or some aspect of Fantasy, or that a mystery doesn't have to have the solve the murder. And look--there are ONLY two rules of Romance. They aren't complicated. That is
> 1) That THE central plot is the relationship and the couple coming together
> 2) The there is an emotionally satisfying ending (aka the happily ever after / happily for now)
> 
> All this other stuff--no cheating, no triangles, no this or that--those aren't rules. Those are things that different readers prefer or don't prefer. There are only two rules in Romance; everything else is negotiable. But to say that you want to change one of those two rules means that either a) you don't know the genre or b) you don't respect the genre. Don't want a HEA? Fine. Don't write a HEA. But please don't call it Romance and then say that the genre has to has to change with the times.


I should just follow you around with a "Yeahthat" sign. You are more clear than my babbling.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Atunah said:


> Not sure what paperbacks have to do with it. I read ebooks, but its just a different medium, paper or ebook, its the same book.
> 
> I am not saying those serials and non HEA books are not selling. Of course they are. I am not saying people don't love them, they do. But none of that makes them romance. Just because something is stuck into romance on Amazon by the author, doesn't make it romance. It doesn't mean the genre is suddenly changing away from the one thing that defines it, HEA. If you stick a thriller into sci fi, it doesn't mean the sci fi genre suddenly must change.
> 
> ...


I don't think anyone is advocating not writing a HEA and just ending the story there. I promise I'm not an evil romance-destroying happy-ending-hating monster.  I think it's just a matter of assessing the scope and size of works. For a serialized novella the story spans over multiple volumes and the HEA can wait until the end of that volume. Either way I will be very clearly marking my series when it goes up so there will be no confusion. And then once it's complete I'll be packaging it as a box-set so that readers who don't like to have to deal with uncertainty at the end of an installment can read it that way. I agree that it's important to be clear about these things.

But as long as the HEA comes eventually, isn't it still following the conventions of the genre?

I would also say, Anne you're right in that the steamier romances can get away with this more readily than the less steamy romance. It's a good point.

Never my desire to alienate readers or make it seem like I don't care about their opinions -- I do. But I also can look at the market and see what's selling, and think about what I want to write, make sure that I'm packaging carefully, and feel okay about myself and my choices at the end of the day.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Atunah said:


> I should just follow you around with a "Yeahthat" sign. You are more clear than my babbling.





Anne Victory said:


> No. That's like saying that for a book to be fantasy it doesn't have to have magic or fantastical creatures or some aspect of Fantasy, or that a mystery doesn't have to have the solve the murder. And look--there are ONLY two rules of Romance. They aren't complicated. That is
> 1) That THE central plot is the relationship and the couple coming together
> 2) The there is an emotionally satisfying ending (aka the happily ever after / happily for now)
> 
> ...


No, I think it would be more like saying, is it still mystery if they don't crack the big case until the end of the series, instead of at the end of Book One. Or is it still fantasy if we don't see the magical world until the very end of book one.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

In a SERIAL novel, I don't see how you could have an HEA (or why you would want one) at the end of the individual installments. On the contrary, you'd want to make the reader wait until the end of the story. Which is completely different than in a SERIES, which is several different stories, as opposed to one story released in installments. Still, you can have a series arc with the HEA at the end, as long as there's an HFN at the end of each standalone book. 

If you don't have an HFN at the end of your standalone books in a series, then I'm sorry, that's not romance. Maybe urban fantasy or erotica or new adult. If you want to market it as romance, though, the book police won't stop you.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> If you don't have an HFN at the end of your standalone books in a series, then I'm sorry, that's not romance. Maybe urban fantasy or erotica or new adult. If you want to market it as romance, though, the book police won't stop you.


Sooooooooo I really don't understand where NA falls under the romance genre. I read a few books I thought were contemporary only to find they were labeled NA. It seems like romance with characters in their early 20s. Is there more to it than that? Am I missing something obvious?


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> I don't think anyone is advocating not writing a HEA and just ending the story there. I promise I'm not an evil romance-destroying happy-ending-hating monster.  I think it's just a matter of assessing the scope and size of works. For a serialized novella the story spans over multiple volumes and the HEA can wait until the end of that volume. Either way I will be very clearly marking my series when it goes up so there will be no confusion. And then once it's complete I'll be packaging it as a box-set so that readers who don't like to have to deal with uncertainty at the end of an installment can read it that way. I agree that it's important to be clear about these things.
> 
> But as long as the HEA comes eventually, isn't it still following the conventions of the genre?
> 
> ...


Of course you need to write what you want to write and of course you want to sell well. And yes, marking things clearly helps a lot. You will still get the reviews from readers that are unhappy, just be prepared for that.

As to all the parts in one? For me I don't think I would like that either and that is because if it is written like a true serial, it would not read like one complete novel at the end. It would like small short stories within a story. So it wouldn't flow like a novel. Otherwise it would just be a chopped up novel into chapters. So even if there is then a HEA at the end, it wouldn't read like one complete novel and I would probably find it choppy in that way. Now if its clearly marked that it is a collection of short stories or serial parts, I wouldn't touch it anyway. For me serials are a genre on their own, like short stories.

But I already stated how I feel about it all. There are plenty of genres out there for everyone. Romance is one of them. Not everything has to fit in there and not everything that gets stuck in it is romance. I have to deal with it. Just means I am not as likely anymore trying new authors. I stick with known authors and publishers.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

New Adult and Young Adult are demographics, not genres. I actually have an article about it at my website: http://victoryediting.com/demographics-vs-genres/

EDIT: Now that I'm on my laptop and not on my phone, I wanted to add a bit. New Adult books started mainly in the Romance genre, but it's starting to branch out now, which is a good thing. I've no doubt that in a few years we'll see titles across the board as far as genres go. There's really so much that can be done with it--New Adult is a critical point in your life, and I think there's a lot of issues to be explored. First apartment, going to college, first real job, first real relationship--lots and lots of stuff


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Interesting. I'm getting quite the education tonight. Perhaps I should market my next novel series as urban fantasy and hope my current PNR readers follow me.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

J Ryan said:


> Interesting. I'm getting quite the education tonight. Perhaps I should market my next novel series as urban fantasy and hope my current PNR readers follow me.


Plenty of us read both. I love PNR and I love Urban Fantasy. We even have a thread in the book corner here where we talk about PNR and UF. . I just have different expectations for the 2 genres, but there is lots of cross over readers.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

What I've heard (from a bestselling NA author at the 2013 RWA conference) is that NA falls between romance and women's fiction. It's got a central romance that focuses strongly on the heroine's journey. It doesn't have to follow all the conventions of romance—it can be edgier—but it should at least have an HFN. 

I've never heard of NA in other genres that fall completely outside the romance umbrella. Sure, you could have NA urban fantasy or steampunk. But NA sci-fi or thrillers, without romantic elements? Haven't heard of those yet.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Wow. This thread is hopping. Reposting this bit about New Adult since people have posted before I edited my post  Anyway, New Adult books started mainly in the Romance genre, but it's starting to branch out now, which is a good thing. I've no doubt that in a few years we'll see titles across the board as far as genres go. There's really so much that can be done with it--New Adult is a critical point in your life, and I think there's a lot of issues to be explored. First apartment, going to college, first real job, first real relationship--lots and lots of stuff


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> Interesting. I'm getting quite the education tonight. Perhaps I should market my next novel series as urban fantasy and hope my current PNR readers follow me.


I think it's likely. The two genres share a huge crossover audience. I can name a boatload of authors who publish in both and do well in each. Nalini Singh, Meljean Brook, Marjorie Liu, Ilona Andrews. That's just off the top of my head.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> No, I think it would be more like saying, is it still mystery if they don't crack the big case until the end of the series, instead of at the end of Book One. Or is it still fantasy if we don't see the magical world until the very end of book one.


I don't know that you'd have many readers follow a series of mysteries or a fantasy book that read like contemporary fiction. As Andrea said, though, that's a series... not a serial. Those are two different critters  Similar to the point with Romance, what are the characters doing for 80k words if they aren't solving the whodunnit? If they can't solve the mystery in 80,000 words, is that really the main focus of the book? Fantasy--I don't read fantasy to read contemporary but a character spots a unicorn in the park. That's not fantasy


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> What I've heard (from a bestselling NA author at the 2013 RWA conference) is that NA falls between romance and women's fiction. It's got a central romance that focuses strongly on the heroine's journey. It doesn't have to follow all the conventions of romance--it can be edgier--but it should at least have an HFN.
> 
> I've never heard of NA in other genres that fall completely outside the romance umbrella. Sure, you could have NA urban fantasy or steampunk. But NA sci-fi or thrillers, without romantic elements? Haven't heard of those yet.


She would be wrong. And that's not trying to knock her. There's a huge conception / misunderstanding about the differences between demographics and genres. You're right that there aren't a lot of other genres of NA out there yet, but that's because the demographic started with mainly Romance, so it's going to grow from there, but we _are_ seeing other genres. Although also, it has to be noted that in a fantasy setting (or scifi, etc.) I'm not sure how much some of the hallmarks of the age group would apply. Kids in Middle Earth aren't worried about going off to college or getting an internship or whatever 

Edit: Classification of books mainly falls to libraries and booksellers. It's useful for publishers and authors and readers so that everyone can be on the same page about what they're getting in a book, but it's not something that a lot of people necessarily put a lot of thought into.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

I think when you move from having a HEA/HFN in each book to stretching that out in a series or serial, you move from capital-R Romance to little-r romance, genre-wise. (In little-r romance, the romance is often a big part of a story but not necessarily the central focus. It's hard to drag will-they or won't-they romance out for multiple books without something else to carry the plot.) 

You will definitely get some overlap between the two audiences, and IMO there's a large market for each, and there are some definite similarities - but hardcore fans of genre Romance (like Atunah, who I hope takes that as a compliment!) are not going to follow. Serial fiction is well-hated and well-loved. 

So if you stretch out the HFN, you're looking at a slightly different market.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> I've never heard of NA in other genres that fall completely outside the romance umbrella. Sure, you could have NA urban fantasy or steampunk. But NA sci-fi or thrillers, without romantic elements? Haven't heard of those yet.


At the moment, New Adult is purely a romance thing. For example, most of the characters in my SF series are theoretically in the new adult age range, yet I wouldn't dream of labelling the series new adult. First of all, because SF readers wouldn't know what to make of the term, ditto for the other non-romance genres. Secondly because I'm not a fan of this whole "new adult as a separate demographic/label" thing. 18 to 25 year olds are adults and don't need a separate shelf in the bookstore. Finally, while my SF characters might be "new adults", their experiences fighting the galactic rebellion have no connection to the modern US college experience (which seems to be at the heart of the new adult genre).


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

> Of course you need to write what you want to write and of course you want to sell well. And yes, marking things clearly helps a lot. You will still get the reviews from readers that are unhappy, just be prepared for that.
> 
> As to all the parts in one? For me I don't think I would like that either and that is because if it is written like a true serial, it would not read like one complete novel at the end.


I hope the way I choose to write my books would never discourage someone else from trying other new authors. :-( I take my responsibility to the community seriously. This is why I've made sure to have my books professionally edited, proofread, and did what I thought was pretty thorough market research. I always want to be representing indie-authorship as something professional and positive. Even if readers don't agree with my choices, I'd hope that what I and other authors like me do wouldn't discourage them from trying new authors entirely -- especially when I and other authors like me have been very careful to delineate what our book is in both length and format. There are plenty of great new romance books being published by authors adhering to a more rigorous interpretation of what is "romance".

As for it being "choppy" as a boxed set. All of my novellas have internal arcs, much the same way a TV episode does. My goal is for it to be no more choppy then say -- binge watching House of Cards. That said, it's very possible I won't succeed. Once the novella drops we'll find out I suppose.



Anne Victory said:


> I think it's likely. The two genres share a huge crossover audience. I can name a boatload of authors who publish in both and do well in each. Nalini Singh, Meljean Brook, Marjorie Liu, Ilona Andrews. That's just off the top of my head.
> 
> Similar to the point with Romance, what are the characters doing for 80k words if they aren't solving the whodunnit? If they can't solve the mystery in 80,000 words, is that really the main focus of the book?


I'd be curious of example of successful self-published authors doing this. All the authors listed are traditionally published, yes?

Also the question becomes it depends on the mystery. There can be larger and smaller plot arcs solved. Larger and smaller mysteries. It's possible we might not find out who the murderer is by the end of book one, but we might find out who killed the murderer. Or perhaps we solve one murder and discover that there's another bigger-bad who was behind it all a long, and now we have to defeat him. I see these series as less of the traditional series of books, and more as an almost long-form serialization.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> At the moment, New Adult is purely a romance thing. For example, most of the characters in my SF series are theoretically in the new adult age range, yet I wouldn't dream of labelling the series new adult. First of all, because SF readers wouldn't know what to make of the term, ditto for the other non-romance genres. Secondly because I'm not a fan of this whole "new adult as a separate demographic/label" thing. 18 to 25 year olds are adults and don't need a separate shelf in the bookstore. Finally, while my SF characters might be "new adults", their experiences fighting the galactic rebellion have no connection to the modern US college experience (which seems to be at the heart of the new adult genre).


I completely agree. I think with some settings, the New Adult thing doesn't really even apply. It might, I guess, if your protagonists were at the Star Fleet Academy, but aside from that, yeah. Not so much


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

DianaGabriel said:


> I think when you move from having a HEA/HFN in each book to stretching that out in a series or serial, you move from capital-R Romance to little-r romance, genre-wise. (In little-r romance, the romance is often a big part of a story but not necessarily the central focus. It's hard to drag will-they or won't-they romance out for multiple books without something else to carry the plot.)
> 
> You will definitely get some overlap between the two audiences, and IMO there's a large market for each, and there are some definite similarities - but hardcore fans of genre Romance (like Atunah, who I hope takes that as a compliment!) are not going to follow. Serial fiction is well-hated and well-loved.
> 
> So if you stretch out the HFN, you're looking at a slightly different market.


Yes, I'll that that as a compliment.  But I also read other genres, like urban fantasy, historical mystery, mysteries, etc. Romance is my favorite though and I have expectations when I read that genre. Just like I have expectations when I read historical mysteries. The thing is that romance readers are fiercely protective of the genre, we love it with all its flaws. Look at all the themes and tropes we survived over the years within the genre. Look at all the sneers we get, the belittling we get, the stereotypes. We just love the genre, its special. Its massive and it is so fantastical. All the subgenres. I can have literally everything, historical, sci fi, fantasy, paranormal, contemporary, funny, I can have it all. As much as some like to say its the most restricted genre, its actually the most varied because of all the subgenres. From super dark to fluffy witty. From barely a kiss to full one sexitimes. From pirates on the sea, to cowboys and small town folks. We also love to blabble about what we like and don't like.

And with ebooks and back list titles, we get to read older beloved stuff again. You know how much some of those beloved paperbacks go for on used markets of out of print romance titles?

It doesn't need to change. It has evolved from the moment it was made main stream. It is always going to evolve, but it will always be romance at the heart. Always have a HEA or a HFN. Otherwise its cutting the heart literally out of the genre. And its just not going to go away.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> I'd be curious of example of successful self-published authors doing this. All the authors listed are traditionally published, yes?


These ladies are clients of mine, but here's a few:

Marie Hall: Her Kingdom series falls under Paranormal Romance (same world, different couple and HEA for each book), while her Night series is an Urban Fantasy centering around Pandora.

Dannika Dark: Her Mageri Series is UF, and her new Seven series is PNR.

Elizabeth Hunter: Elemental World (PNR), Irin Chronicles (UF)

There are a lot more, but that's a couple off the top of my head


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> These ladies are clients of mine, but here's a few:
> 
> Marie Hall: Her Kingdom series falls under Paranormal Romance (same world, different couple and HEA for each book), while her Night series is an Urban Fantasy centering around Pandora.
> 
> ...


All of those ladies use the word romance in conjunction with urban fantasy on their websites and branding.


----------



## WordNinja (Jun 26, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> She would be wrong.


Well, not exactly. In the summer of 2013, I think she was 100% correct. But NA is a rapidly changing target. We don't know what it's going to grow into, or whether it will stay clustered in the romance arena.

Right now, NA is still a synonym for college romance. It's not completely analogous with YA in that sense. But everything could change tomorrow. Two years ago, most of us had never heard of NA.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Anne Victory said:


> I completely agree. I think with some settings, the New Adult thing doesn't really even apply. It might, I guess, if your protagonists were at the Star Fleet Academy, but aside from that, yeah. Not so much


I suspect that even Star Fleet Academy would be quite different from a modern day US college. As a matter of fact, I have problems relating to NA, because my own university experience in Germany doesn't even remotely match what is described in those NA books.

With SF and fantasy you have the additional problem that even if the characters are in the new adult age range for one or two books, future books in the series might follow them through their lives into the post-na range or there might be multiple POV characters, some of which are older, etc... For example, two of Lois McMaster Bujold's Miles Vorkosigan books might be classified as NA, the rest wouldn't fit, because the series follows Miles from approx. age 18 to age 40 and that's not even counting the two books about his parents.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Apr 6, 2014)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> All of those ladies use the word romance in conjunction with urban fantasy on their websites and branding.


It makes sense for these authors to brand their websites for both genres, as there's a good amount of crossover between readers certain subgenres of romance (fantasy romance and paranormal romance particularly) and urban fantasy.

It's very common for UF to have elements of romance and romantic relationships, but they don't have romance as the main focus of the books in the way that a romance novel would. If you read some of the books by authors on Anne's list, I think the difference between their urban fantasy and paranormal romance books will be pretty clear. The branding for the two genres are different, the focus of the plots are different, and the endings are different. The romances end in HEA/HFN, and the UF books don't have that limitation, especially in a series.

Having a love story doesn't automatically place a book in the romance genre. Love subplots are in every kind of book there is out there. People like to read about love, happily for us.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> All of those ladies use the word romance in conjunction with urban fantasy on their websites and branding.


Yep. There is a subgenre of Urban Fantasy that's commonly known as Urban Fantasy Romance. This is different and distinct from both Paranormal Romance and also more traditional Urban Fantasy like the Dresden Files, which features a male protagonist and has no real relationship going in it. While there is good crossover between PNR and UFR and it's true that fans of Nalini Singh's Psi-Changeling books will probably like Ilona Andrew's Kate Daniels series, they probably won't care so much for Jim Butcher and Harry Dresden (though they might). Anyway, Urban Fantasy Romance a subgenre of Fantasy > Urban Fantasy > Urban Fantasy Romance, whereas PNR is a subgenre of Romance.

The problem with not labeling your books correctly / marketing them correctly is that you're liable to piss off readers of both genres, ESPECIALLY if you're crossing genres. I know of more than one author who's had pissed-off readers because their publisher categorized their new PNR series as UF to try to appeal to her already huge fanbase. This resulted in complaints of too much sex, too much daydreaming about one another, blah blah. Had the books been shelved / categorized by the publisher as PNR, that could have been avoided. The same thing goes the other way. And absolutely if you're going for Urban Fantasy Romance you want to let people know, because if they're looking for the Dresden Files and there's a central love story like in The Night Huntress books, that's going to turn readers off.

Genre classifications aren't there to hobble authors, they're there to make sure that readers and authors are on the same page and readers aren't getting some sort of mystery grab bag when they get a book


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

CMD said:


> It makes sense for these authors to brand their websites for both genres, as there's a good amount of crossover between readers certain subgenres of romance (fantasy romance and paranormal romance particularly) and urban fantasy.
> 
> It's very common for UF to have elements of romance and romantic relationships, but they don't have romance as the main focus of the books in the way that a romance novel would. If you read some of the books by authors on Anne's list, I think the difference between their urban fantasy and paranormal romance books will be pretty clear. The branding for the two genres are different, the focus of the plots are different, and the endings are different. The romances end in HEA/HFN, and the UF books don't have that limitation, especially in a series.
> 
> Having a love story doesn't automatically place a book in the romance genre. Love subplots are in every kind of book there is out there. People like to read about love, happily for us.


Sorry I should have been clearer. Not just their websites are banded for both genres, but the individual books:

USA Today Bestselling Urban Fantasy Romance Series Night
Books 1, 2, and 3

THE SCRIBE is the first book in the Irin Chronicles, the new paranormal romance series from Elizabeth Hunter, author of the Elemental Mysteries.

And so on.

All of these authors are branding their series as romances. The first one offers some wiggle room, the second is pretty clear cut. She calls the Irin series straight paranormal romance. Whether or not the series actually fall into the rigorous categories is a little bit moot, because that's how they're branding them. That's what best-sellers are using as brands to sell books and reach readers. And obviously readers are responding positively.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> Yep. There is a subgenre of Urban Fantasy that's commonly known as Urban Fantasy Romance. This is different and distinct from both Paranormal Romance and also more traditional Urban Fantasy like the Dresden Files, which features a male protagonist and has no real relationship going in it. While there is good crossover between PNR and UFR and it's true that fans of Nalini Singh's Psi-Changeling books will probably like Ilona Andrew's Kate Daniels series, they probably won't care so much for Jim Butcher and Harry Dresden (though they might). Anyway, Urban Fantasy Romance a subgenre of Fantasy > Urban Fantasy > Urban Fantasy Romance, whereas PNR is a subgenre of Romance.
> 
> The problem with not labeling your books correctly / marketing them correctly is that you're liable to p*ss off readers of both genres, ESPECIALLY if you're crossing genres. I know of more than one author who's had p*ssed-off readers because their publisher categorized their new PNR series as UF to try to appeal to her already huge fanbase. This resulted in complaints of too much sex, too much daydreaming about one another, blah blah. Had the books been shelved / categorized by the publisher as PNR, that could have been avoided. The same thing goes the other way. And absolutely if you're going for Urban Fantasy Romance you want to let people know, because if they're looking for the Dresden Files and there's a central love story like in The Night Huntress books, that's going to turn readers off.
> 
> Genre classifications aren't there to hobble authors, they're there to make sure that readers and authors are on the same page and readers aren't getting some sort of mystery grab bag when they get a book


This is exactly my point. There's a reason why if I were to write a first book in a series that focused on a romance but had a cliffhanger ending I wouldn't market it as straight Urban Fantasy.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> Sorry I should have been clearer. Not just their websites are banded for both genres, but the individual books:
> 
> USA Today Bestselling Urban Fantasy Romance Series Night
> Books 1, 2, and 3
> ...


See my point about Urban Fantasy Romance not being part of the Romance genre.

As for The Irin Chronicles--the author had some backlash for book one because it did not feature a HEA for the book and there was a cliffhanger. You'll note that book 2, The Singer, is branded as contemporary fantasy.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Andrea @ ArtWellPub said:


> Well, not exactly. In the summer of 2013, I think she was 100% correct. But NA is a rapidly changing target. We don't know what it's going to grow into, or whether it will stay clustered in the romance arena.
> 
> Right now, NA is still a synonym for college romance. It's not completely analogous with YA in that sense. But everything could change tomorrow. Two years ago, most of us had never heard of NA.


For sure. But as it gains ground, I think it's going to be useless as a genre classification. I actually worked on a New Adult Urban Fantasy not too long ago, so it's going to happen.

I also agree that NA is not going to cover all genres. It will probably stay in the Urban Fantasy, Romance, Women's Fiction, and maybe Cozy Mystery genres and subgenres, because others just won't lend themselves to the demographic. A hard-boiled detective will probably not be in the 22-25 age range


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> This is exactly my point. There's a reason why if I were to write a first book in a series that focused on a romance but had a cliffhanger ending I wouldn't market it as straight Urban Fantasy.


I think that would be very wise on your part, Sylvia  And it doesn't help the genre confusion either that publishers (trad) are bad about trying to put UFR books into PNR and vice versa, whether through ignorance or to try to milk the cash cow. Either could be true. And now with a lot of book shopping being done online, we're not seeing distinct "shelves" so much these days. For what it's worth, I majored in Library Science, so a lot of this stuff isn't necessarily something most people even think about  But I think it's very useful for its primary purpose--to make sure that readers are connected with the books they want to read


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> See my point about Urban Fantasy Romance not being part of the Romance genre.
> 
> As for The Irin Chronicles--the author had some backlash for book one because it did not feature a HEA for the book and there was a cliffhanger. You'll note that book 2, The Singer, is branded as contemporary fantasy.


Backlash aside it sold well and we could ask the question would it have been successful if it had been marketed as contemporary fantasy? My gut says no. Having romance in there somewhere, whether as the main attraction or at the side is I think a very useful sales and branding tool for a story that's clearly about two people falling in love. 
Furthermore when I go to Amazon Book Two shows up as paranormal romance for me in the URL bar up top.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I think she's got a wide enough audience that anything she writes will be snapped up pretty eagerly by her fans. Here's the thing--most readers of Paranormal Romance who also enjoy Urban Fantasy Romance are okay with cliffhangers and an ongoing story that doesn't necessarily have a HEA, as long as we're not taken by surprise. I like steak and I also like pasta. But if I'm expecting a prime rib and I get spaghetti, I'm not going to be happy.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Granted, I haven't read the books, don't know anything about the story, but... are your betas primarily Romance readers? Do they read much fantasy? Frankly, I think that's BS. If they have a one-night-stand and then don't see each other again, there's no relationship, there's nothing to cheat on. What, exactly, is he supposed to be pining about? I will say that some readers have a tendency to want to pair people up regardless of how the story should be. Some will be disappointed if there's no romance. This would be one area where, depending on how you feel, I might encourage you to stick to your story guns. Food for thought.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

EelKat,

Oh, the friend never read my book. Not even the blurb. I just told him it was romance, and he assumed it was porn. Nothing wrong with erotica, but his dismissive attitude was effing annoying. It annoys me that romantica is called porn (as an insult) but the the GoT TV show is edgy and adult because of all the boobies.

For my next series, I'm definitely going to finesse it to be either more NA or more erotic romance. Right now, I think I'm stuck in between a few genres. 

I don't want to go back and rewrite the book (and redo proofread and formatting, and possibly ask for more reviews--ugh. It's done and it is what it is, and I'm not George Lucas!) But, I can easily age down my MC from 26 to 22-24 and redub it NA.

Or can I call it NA even though my MC is in her mid 20s?

I'm just glad I am publishing slowly at this point. I am making so many mistakes already, but I'm learning from them... hopefully.

Also, Monk is one of my favorite shows. Way more genius than anything I will ever write!


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

EelKat said:


> I say to him "hey, your dad read my book!' He goes, "but you write gay erotica" me; "Yeah, and your dad left a 5 star review" bam, flat out on the floor.


Oh my God I am dying over here. You are hilarious. I want to come over and visit 

_Edit: to fix typo, laughing when I typed_


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CrystalKay said:


> It's done and it is what it is, and I'm not George Lucas!) But, I can easily age down my MC from 26 to 22-24 and redub it NA.
> 
> Or can I call it NA even though my MC is in her mid 20s?


Just calling something NA or even changing her age isn't going to make a book NA if it's not. Similarly, if it _is_ NA, then mid-twenties should be fine. NA is all about becoming an adult--college, first real job, first apartment, first serious "adult" relationship, separating and growing independent from your parents, that sort of thing.


----------



## StraightNoChaser (Dec 29, 2013)

Cherise Kelley said:


> But each book should end with a Happy For Now.


I get a little to complacent with the couple when I get an HFN and am less likely to read the follow ups. I like emotional closure, as in they overcame whatever relationship obstacle the book was focusing on, but I need a good cliffhanger storywise to want to come back.



Anne Victory said:


> The journey of a couple to find each other and to get their HEA. If you're stretching that out over three books, is the RELATIONSHIP the main focus? I'm going to say probably not, because what the heck are they doing for 275k words that they aren't getting together?
> 
> Not to be argumentative, but please give an example of a Paranormal Romance that features the same couple where the HEA is stretched out over multiple books. That sounds like Urban Fantasy (subgenre Urban Fantasy Romance--Kate Daniels as an example). While the two subgenres are similar and often share the same audience, they aren't the same and have different requirements.


I wrote a successful (60,000 units sold) NA erotic romance trilogy where they didn't really have much of an HFN at the end of each book. It had a lot of suspense elements so they spent all that time overcoming external obstacles so that they could be together.



CrystalKay said:


> But, I can easily age down my MC from 26 to 22-24 and redub it NA.
> 
> Or can I call it NA even though my MC is in her mid 20s?


It needs to have some more NA elements aside from the age. I don't think it has to be extremely, purely new job/in college/first real relationship to be classified as NA but there needs to be something self discovering about it. If it's heavy on the erotic content that will help too.


----------



## Cody Young (Apr 6, 2011)

If one of the characters is older than the typical NA protag - can I still call the romance NA? It is a 'first real relationship' it is a 'first job' situation and the female protag is eighteen. But the hero is 28. It also examines some dark themes - e.g. sexual trafficking. Can I get away with calling it NA or would it be better to just call it contemporary romance. What do you think?
Cody


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

StraightNoChaser said:


> I wrote a successful (60,000 units sold) NA erotic romance trilogy where they didn't really have much of an HFN at the end of each book. It had a lot of suspense elements so they spent all that time overcoming external obstacles so that they could be together.


With the note that I haven't read your book so I don't know for sure, but that to me sounds like a suspense series with a heavy romantic arc. And that's cool--nobody says books that aren't strictly Romance are bad or anything, they're not, and they obviously sell just fine. I just wouldn't categorize them as "Romance."

Totally agree with what you said about the NA thing.


----------



## AssanaBanana (Feb 1, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> What's wrong with stretching the HEA over 3 books if it's a series starring the same characters? If you do the HEA in book one then what's left for books 2 and 3?


I think you can split the books into stages of the relationship. I have a trilogy planned for this fall. In the first book the couple only gets to the "I love you" stage but the overlying situation they are in leaves a lot if things up in the air. The first book ends with just a HFN. In the second book, they have a life or death situation that reaffirms their feelings - ("holy shit I would die inside if I lost this person"). It ends in another HFN because again, the major story arc isn't letting them have their HEA just yet, but the minor arc of their relationship has progressed to something even deeper ("we almost died, but didn't, and it just proves how much I love you"). In the third book they finally get their ultimate resolution. Bad guy gets his, and they fnally get their HEA.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Danni said:


> As for PNR books that follow one couple and are a serial style, I'm not familiar with those in the traditional sense as they seem to be a new style popping up.
> 
> I think it gets tougher for indies to label their books because the genres are broadening and changing every day.


Thanks for that, Dannika.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Danni said:


> As for crossover, there's not as much as you think, even labeling both as romance. The main reason being UF readers enjoy more of the story element and following the same protag through a series. Since the majority of PNR books I've read are a series which follows a different couple in each book who are all interconnected, PNR readers tend to enjoy a more formulated story (examples: Lords of the Underworld, Dark Hunters, BDB, Midnight Breed, etc). I've got some fan crossover, but my new PNR series is mainly new readers. I will say you can encourage more of your readers to try the new sub genre by writing in the same world and having character crossovers. ;-) I can throw romance on my writing all I want, but the crossover just isn't what you think. As for PNR books that follow one couple and are a serial style, I'm not familiar with those in the traditional sense as they seem to be a new style popping up.


I find this interesting. I am a huge romance fan, as I am sure everyone knows by now. 
But, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy the story element of UF. Its not one or the other. Now I will usually know by vetting which UF has more romantic elements than others. I loved the Sookie series, I read Anita Blake up to a point, afraid of the after, based on reviews. I started the Dresden series where I have some issues, but not because of any romantic plot or not, but because of the character of Harry. I will also read the Hearne series soon. I love the R.L Naquin series, I love the Chicago Vampire series which is UF with more romantic elements. I don't like the BDB series, you'd think I would because of the romantic elements, but I don't like other stuff about the story.

And just hanging out with other readers online, I am not alone in this. I don't expect every book I pick up to be a romance. Heck, I used to belong to the Stephen King library back in Germany where they send me a book every few weeks and I plowed through those, which started a horror reading period. I used to read a pulp fiction series in Germany called John Sinclair. He was hunting Ghouls and creatures and such, I would consider that a UF series, no romantic anything in sight.

Its really all about expectations. Go check out the PNR/UF thread in the book corner. Lots of us have shared what we liked and such. Its shows lots of crossover reading. Now are there some that will only read UF with romantic elements? Sure. But I think romance readers are much more flexible in their reading as they get credit for. 

I also see Jeaniene Frost series as UF. UF with strong romantic elements. The ones with Cat and Bones. Some of the in between single books about other couples are more PNR. 
I do think that some are a bit harder to identify, especially if the same couple keeps going. And at that point, the writer better not kill one of the couple off a few books down the line as there is then an expectation.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Danni said:


> The interesting thing is Jeaniene frost labels her series as paranormal romance, but if you strip away the bones/kat relationship, there's a story that I'd lean it more toward UF with romantic elements.


Hi, Danni! Glad you're feeling better  Great points. My only quibble--Jeaniene actually says on her website that Night Huntress books are Urban Fantasy Romance:
"The NIGHT HUNTRESS series is an urban fantasy romance featuring half-vampire heroine Cat Crawfield and Master vampire hero, Bones. My heroine and hero have a difficult road ahead of them and they will have to work very hard to earn their HEA (happily-ever-after), so their story isn't over with the first book. Hope you come along for the ride!"

That said, with Paranormal Romance, if you go with the idea that the pivotal plot is the couple coming together and the rest is incidental, then the main plot is resolved each book (HEA). The ongoing series arc, of course, is unresolved, though it's been furthered.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I suspect, and this is nothing but my gut instinct, that it's probably an easier sell to convert PNR fans to an UFR series than vice versa. Romance fans will probably be just fine with less romance, but UF fans may feel like there's too much goo-goo eyes going on for their taste.

Jesse--my two cents, I'd classify that as Urban Fantasy Romance. In UFR I would expect the same protagonist/s, but in Paranormal Romance, I'd be expecting that particular couple's story to be fully wrapped up.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

SarahWritesSometimes said:


> I think people on here are trying to help you, and answer your question directly. And the answer to your question is that for romance, there must be a HFN or HEA at the end of every single book. It does not matter if the romance is part of a series or not. I am writing a 7-part romance series, all full length novels, all inter-related, but there will be a HEA at the end of every single book.


Um, Fifty Shades of Grey ended with the heroine leaving the hero for good. They got back together right away in the next book, but they broke up at the end of the first. Surrender Your Love also had a breakup at the end of the book. I never read the other books in that trilogy, but I would imagine that they got back together right away in the second book. Those are just two books that I read where the first book had neither a HFN or HEA. I'm sure that there are many more.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I think a lot of folk would say 50 Shades isn't Romance. And that's okay. Not being part of the Romance genre isn't a bad thing. I am one of the biggest fans of Romance out there, but it's not the end all, be all. I'm not dissing books that aren't Romance, I just want books to be classified correctly. I think that's all most readers want, and publishers / authors should want the same thing. Satisfied readers are happy readers, after all


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Anne Victory said:


> I think a lot of folk would say 50 Shades isn't Romance. And that's okay. Not being part of the Romance genre isn't a bad thing. I am one of the biggest fans of Romance out there, but it's not the end all, be all. I'm not dissing books that aren't Romance, I just want books to be classified correctly. I think that's all most readers want, and publishers / authors should want the same thing. Satisfied readers are happy readers, after all


Not to be argumentative, but if Fifty Shades isn't a romance, then what is it? I think it's been pretty unanimous that it's classified as erotic romance, and I've never seen it classified as anything else. The second book is romantic suspense, too, but that's still a sub genre of romance.


----------



## anotherpage (Apr 4, 2012)

CrystalKay said:


> Where do you draw the line between women's fiction and romance? I wrote what I thought was a contemporary romance, but I've gotten a lot of pushback from romance readers (especially the people who volunteered to read my book in exchange for a review on Goodreads - eek) because of things in my book that don't fit into the contemporary romance box.
> 
> What would make a book fit firmly into women's fic or firmly into romance? What might alienate readers in either genre?


This is how I define it.

Romance = and ending that is happily ever after or happy for now
Women's fiction = happily ever after, happy for now, tragedy ending or bitter sweet ending ( this is the Nicholas Sparks approach )


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> Not to be argumentative, but if Fifty Shades isn't a romance, then what is it? I think it's been pretty unanimous that it's classified as erotic romance, and I've never seen it classified as anything else. The second book is romantic suspense, too, but that's still a sub genre of romance.


It's not argumentative... it's a discussion  Anyway, I'll preface this by saying I haven't read Fifty Shades--it doesn't sound like my cuppa. That said, reading the plot points (which are pretty thorough) would lead me to classify it as Erotica. And Erotica is not a subgente of Romance--it is its own distinct genre.

The Romance genre has two clear and distinct requirements: (a) main plot is about the relationship and (b) that there is a HEA / HFN. To take away either of those things means you no longer have genre Romance. Period. Amount of sex or there being a love story don't make something a Romance.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

jswww said:


> All I can say is that I really don't care if people label books that aren't genre romance as romance but I will be peeved beyond measure if I am forced to read a non-happy ending book because I found it in romance and it isn't romance. 1 star, no question.
> 
> The problem seems to be that half the authors who haven't been in the industry long enough to know better think that having a romance-centric plot / love story is enough to make a book genre romance. It isn't.
> 
> ...


But Fifty Shades did have an HEA, it just took three books to get there. There's lots of trilogies like that. I'm not sure where those books would fall if not romance, because they're focused on the main couple. It's just that some of the books in the trilogy have crappy endings. They have cliffhanger endings, really, that lead into the next book. I was always under the impression that, as long as the main couple ends up together at the very end of the story, it's still a romance, even if they are broken up at the end of individual installments.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

While I'm thinking about it--I feel the need to clarify the Happily For Now. This does not mean that the couple saves the day and we'll see them again in the next installment. In Romanceland, this means the book is RESOLVED, the relationship is RESOLVED, but for whatever reason, the couple doesn't necessarily get married  or we don't see the 5 years later epilogue with the kids and whatnot.

If the main plot of a Romance is the couple and their journey to get together (it is, that's requirement #1 of two), then the resolution of that plot in an "emotionally satisfying way" (Requirement 2 of two) means that we have no doubt that boy gets girl (or girl gets boy ;-) ). If it's a YA Romance, for instance, that may mean that the kids go to prom together and then it's summer. Who knows what's going to happen when they're forty? But for now, they are together. They are a couple.

That's HEA / HFN. Just because they saved the day and we'll see them again in Book #3 doesn't make it the "emotionally satisfying ending" that Romance is talking about. If the HEA just meant a happy ending, 90% of the books out there would meet the requirement.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> But Fifty Shades did have an HEA, it just took three books to get there. There's lots of trilogies like that. I'm not sure where those books would fall if not romance, because they're focused on the main couple. It's just that some of the books in the trilogy have crappy endings. They have cliffhanger endings, really, that lead into the next book. I was always under the impression that, as long as the main couple ends up together at the very end of the story, it's still a romance, even if they are broken up at the end of individual installments.


You'd have lots of disappointed Romance readers if they went into it thinking they'd have their HEA. I went into it already, but a HEA is an emotionally satisfying resolution of the ROMANCE at the end of each book, it's not the exact same think as a happy ending.


----------



## StraightNoChaser (Dec 29, 2013)

Anne Victory said:


> The Romance genre has two clear and distinct requirements: (a) main plot is about the relationship and (b) that there is a HEA / HFN. To take away either of those things means you no longer have genre Romance. Period. Amount of sex or there being a love story don't make something a Romance.


FSOG definitely fits that criteria. So did my trilogy, I've never gotten a single comment that it's not a true romance. Calling it suspense wouldn't work, that's not the focus of the plot, it's the couple. These books would be classified as erotic romance, which is closer to romance than erotica and still follows romance rules.

Taking multiple books to achieve the HEA is common. The Crossfire series, The Heart of Stone triology by KM Scott. There are lots of em.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

StraightNoChaser said:


> FSOG definitely fits that criteria. So did my trilogy, I've never gotten a single comment that it's not a true romance. Calling it suspense wouldn't work, that's not the focus of the plot, it's the couple. These books would be classified as erotic romance, which is closer to romance than erotica and still follows romance rules.
> 
> Taking multiple books to achieve the HEA is common. The Crossfire series, The Heart of Stone triology by KM Scott. There are lots of em.


Yes. Thank you. I think it's too rigid to say that every single book in a series has to have an HFN. As long as the couple ends up together, truly together, at the very end of the series, I think it's a romance. I would imagine, though, if the couple doesn't end up together at the end of a series, there would be pitchforks and torches out - as there should be!


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> Um, Fifty Shades of Grey ended with the heroine leaving the hero for good. They got back together right away in the next book, but they broke up at the end of the first. Surrender Your Love also had a breakup at the end of the book. I never read the other books in that trilogy, but I would imagine that they got back together right away in the second book. Those are just two books that I read where the first book had neither a HFN or HEA. I'm sure that there are many more.


Well, like I wrote in a follow-up post I read 50 shades all at once and only remember the general plot arc. I think that any work that is labeled "romance" should have a HFN or HEA at the end of every book, and I come to that as a reader not a writer. I just read a romance book with a huge cliffhanger and it really p###ed me off. (I am talking series here, not serials, a whole different beast with usually no HFN or HEA until the very end.)

The point I think is that many, many, many readers of romance expect a HFN or even better, a HEA at the end of the book. I think that many writers are unconcerned with this, and are selling well to people who don't care about the HEA. There is a market for serials with cliffhangers, I do understand this.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

StraightNoChaser said:


> Taking multiple books to achieve the HEA is common. The Crossfire series, The Heart of Stone triology by KM Scott. There are lots of em.


As long as your readers are okay with that, then cool. But I would not label any book that didn't have the couple achieving HEA/HFN in "their" book as a Romance, and as a reader I'd frankly be irritated (probably downright pissed depending on the day of the week) if I'd gotten a book expecting that HEA and the book didn't deliver. Again, that doesn't mean that it's a bad book or that it won't sell or anything of the sort, it just means that I wouldn't classify it as genre Romance.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

jswww said:


> Choice words here are "installments" and cliffhangers. These are not complete books. They would fall under the "serialized romance" label as far as I'm concerned.
> ETA: I have nothing against serialized fiction. I just want to be warned in advance that that is what I'm getting instead of a complete romance novel, if this is what you're trying to sell to me as a genre romance.


Agreed on this. If I get sold an romance and end up with a incomplete story, I am not going to be happy. To me, if there are 3 books to get to the end of the romance, HEA, then to me it is a novel chopped into 3 parts. Now some of those it would be like 800-1000 pages for one book, but that is what it would take for me to consider it romance. There aren't a lot of books period where I stick with it for 800 pages, Stephen King and the Outlander series are probably the only ones. If I pick up a book that calls itself romance, I expect it to be the complete story there and then. So if there is a cliffhanger I wasn't warned about, or wasn't warned that it was just part of a book, then it will reflect in my rating, which won't be very good. If I know ahead of time, at least I have the choice to try or not. That is all I want, the choice and the knowledge. If I want to I can read 3 parts of 300 pages one after the other and pretend it was published in one book. Choice.

I read the first in the Inside Out series for example, I don't consider that romance at all. Erotic or otherwise.
But I knew going in what it was and that it was several books. I wasn't going in expecting a romance. I read the first in the Thoughtless series and I'd rather have a root canal then ever reading another word about these creatures again. It was so bad I blocked out how it ended. But again, knew what it was going in. I mean I knew about there being 3 books, not how horrific the reading experience would be. 

I also notice that a lot of those trilogies and a lot of the serial stuff being stuffed into romance is often read by readers that didn't come from reading romance, or aren't as familiar with romance. I see a lot of fan fiction readers coming to those. 50 shades as after all a fan fiction about the twilight characters.

Here is the thing, the trilogies and the serials sell fine and they can stand on their own. I get why many want to stuff them into romance, cause romance sells, a lot. But its not needed. They can co exist and they can do so without trying to "change" the romance genre. They can all just be. All I want is upfront knowledge and info. And If I browse in romance genre and the book is marked romance, etc. That is what I expect. And if I don't get that, I'll let my displeasure known. That is all.


----------



## StraightNoChaser (Dec 29, 2013)

Where exactly do multiple books that focus on a relationship go then, especially if the focus is on both members of the couple equally, instead of the heroine, so it doesn't work for women's lit? There just isn't enough plot left in these stories to classify them as anything other than romance. They are romance novels.

My first book they just said i love you, so that was the emotional HFN, but there was a huge, non relationship cliffhanger that could have gotten them both killed. The second book ended on the hero not doing something emotionally devastating but necessary for a long term HEA, so that one was a little iffy, but still a HFN because he didn't do that bad thing. Third had an HEA. It was a starcrossed lovers type of scenario. Where the heck else would it have gone, it was all about the relationship overcoming obstacles, both internal and external.


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

If there were no other elements like PN or UF, then into the romance category it goes.  However, IMO it should be clearly labeled as part of a series (if they were each full-length novels) or an installment of a serial (if shorter than a novel), that makes it really clear to the reader that the HEA will not be happening at the end of that particular work.  I've seen people do this and I appreciate it as a reader.

Things are changing within romance and as a writer that is appealing to me.  But the endings for genre romance have been expected for a long time and from a business standpoint it makes sense to inform the reader of what they are getting.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I'm going to agree with Sarah on this. Part of me wants to say General Fiction--Love Story or similar, but I don't know that that's 100% accurate. And as I've said, genres aren't meant to stifle writers or box an author in a corner, they're meant to help readers find the books they want to read. In that sense, they're less like a fence and more like a signpost. So I'd say Romance, but be very careful to let readers know that the HEA is at the end of the series and not the particular book.

I actually thought of a good analogy a bit ago. A lot of times when a reader picks up a Romance, it's because for whatever reason, we're in the mood for the HEA / HFN. Now, let's juxtapose that with a dining-out experience. You've had a raging sweet tooth all day. You would KILL someone for a piece of cheesecake. So you go to a restaurant that looks like it's got the type of food you enjoy. After all, the whole meal factors into how much you'll enjoy the experience. But, again, it's the dessert that you've been looking forward to. So you have a great meal--everything's perfect. Food is fantastic, service is wonderful, atmosphere is relaxing. Just really five stars. And then you ask the waiter for the dessert menu.

And you know what he says? He says you can't order off their dessert menu unless you've had dinner there three nights in a row. On the third night, you can have your cheesecake. And it's a wonderful cheesecake--the best cheesecake in town. Doesn't that count? What about the fact that they gave you a lemon sorbet between each course to cleanse your palate? Why are you still unhappy? 

So back to Romance--it's similar. We want our dessert. We want the whole meal experience, but we've been craving that decadent ending. So if we want a HEA now, being told we need to wait for three books isn't going to cut it. It's not the same thing at all. I do hope that analogy sheds some light on why for the majority of Romance readers it's so important to have that HEA at the end of each book. If we're not expecting it (because hey--most people don't have dessert with every meal), that's cool. But if we've been craving it, not giving it to us is a surefire way to have an unhappy reader


----------



## anotherpage (Apr 4, 2012)

I always thought the best way to look at creating serial books whether it's 3 or 10 is too look at them like a TV show,

For example:

There is usually ONE running story that goes through say season 1 to 5.
But every episode has a new monster or threat to kill.

Basically every episode can stand alone ( because of the new monster/threat and that is what is resolved at the end of each episode) but die hard fans will keep tuning in to the next one because they eventually want to see the ONE running story resolved. 

If that makes sense. Now I'm speaking about well known shows on tv that have lasted longer than 5 seasons.

The main characters ultimate end may be together ( season 1 to 5 )

Every episode though in between that, will cover their angst, drama, tragedy, flaws, highlights, their hopes, their fears. And each episode will focus in one ONE main thing that it's about. ( i.e it might be about one of the characters taking drugs, someone nearly dies, they come to terms with choices. Next episode might be about XYZ )

That's the way I look at serials. No matter what the genre is ( love, sci-fi, horror ) think of it in terms of TV seasons with episodes. Each one stands alone, each season covers a major change.


----------



## StraightNoChaser (Dec 29, 2013)

Anne Victory said:


> We want our dessert. We want the whole meal experience, but we've been craving that decadent ending. So if we want a HEA now, being told we need to wait for three books isn't going to cut it. It's not the same thing at all. I do hope that analogy sheds some light on why for the majority of Romance readers it's so important to have that HEA at the end of each book. If we're not expecting it (because hey--most people don't have dessert with every meal), that's cool. But if we've been craving it, not giving it to us is a surefire way to have an unhappy reader


And that's why I intend to release the rest of my multi-book same-couple series all at the same time. This way the readers can binge read them all. I can't seem to write a good stand alone, probably because I want to spend more time with the characters. I crave the journey more than the ending, personally.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

I get that some readers want their HEA on every book. Personally, I don't like to read series - I want a resolution at the end of each book I read. That's me as a reader.

As a writer, though, I know two things - standalones are very difficult to market, because you need a funnel. And many readers love series. Fifty Shades of Grey. Crossfire. Shade of Vampire. Surrender Your Love. Callie and Kaden. Etc., etc., etc. Writing in a series, with cliffhangers at the end of my books, is what works for me, and it has worked for many, many others.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Series are fine. Most of the romances I read are in a series. Lots of historical romance is series, so is PNR. But they always have a different couple in each book. There might be an overlaying story line, a mystery of sorts. But they all have a satisfying ending. That is the definition of a romance series for me. Some older saga type historical romances go over several books with the same family, couple. But those are very rare in romance. 
I am just surprised that some don't know about what romance series is. Johanna Lindsay, Mary Balogh, Julie Anne Long, Lisa Kleypas, they all have series, all romance. Different couple each book. Julia Quinn Bridgerton series. Same world, same family all the way through, different couple each book. That is how they go. 

Sometimes its nice to read a standalone. I am very OCD to read series in order so it can get overwhelming at times with everything being in series, even in romance. I can't read out of order, even if its just barely connected.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

What Atunah said. NONE of us is suggesting that Romance authors write standalones. I can name series after series that are favorites. But they EACH have that HEA. The next book in the series features a new couple. The world is the same, readers see the results of previous books--couples from previous books will make appearances or at least be mentioned.  Sometimes, depending on the world, the earlier couples will still be very much a feature, but the story isn't told from their point of view. 

To use the example of Lynn Raye Harris's Hostile Operations Team, you've got a Special Ops team that fights terrorists. Each book has a new adventure--some new plot that needs to be foiled. There is an overarching series plot--we've known there's a mole somewhere in Washington. Last book we found out it's a congressman.  But each book features a different couple and the story is told from their point of view. During the book, we see their relationship grow, usually from the time they meet (or shortly after) until they realize they have feelings for each other and decide that they're going to make a go of things. That's the HEA. The "I love you and I want us to be together." In a series, we'll still see previous couples, but it will no longer be their POV. This lets readers "check in" on their favorite characters, too. Oh, look! Bill and Sue from book 1 are expecting a baby now, that type of thing. Or the family's at a Christmas party and Ted and Jane from Book 2 are still SO in love, making goo-goo eyes at each other. But Bill and Sue and Ted and Jane aren't the focus of this book--Tom and Dana are. 

That is what Romance readers expect. Not a standalone that has no other related books, but they want that HEA if they're reaching for Romance.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Hmmm. Well, I consider myself widely read in the genre, and I think a trilogy that goes HFN - HFN - HEA wth other plot things affecting the couple in various ways (testing their relationship) can definitely be considered romance. I don't think _every_ romance series I've read starts over with a new couple, with cameos of the first couple.

I think as long as each work is self contained, and your readers get their HFN, I think the VAST majority of readers will be eager to pick up the next book to see where the relationship goes. How do they fare under pressure? How do they deal with commitment? How will they grow closer, or apart and then back together? How will they change each other? Will they head for marriage/babies, or not yet, or not ever (depending on circumstances), or can they even agree on the issue? Does a crazy ex come back? (Bad trope, sorry) Does one get hit by a bus, or does some other event radically change the status quo of their relationship? How do they deal? These things speak to what's at the core of the genre: relationships and character growth.

There's a lot to work with, a lot of places to go after the HFN - and I think romance readers do appreciate that.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Just to clarify--I'm not saying and have never said that Romance readers won't read and enjoy books that aren't strictly Romance. That's not the case at all. My point is that if a Romance reader wants that "Romance" experience--i.e. boy meets girl, they're attracted, and they realize they love each other (the HEA), then they won't be satisfied without it. And if they picked up a book that does NOT have a HEA, then they are not going to be happy, they will feel cheated, like they got a box of Cracker Jacks and there wasn't a toy in the box, or now you have to send off for your toy. 


Again--Romance readers read a lot of stuff, and not all of it is Romance. It doesn't have to be a traditional Genre Romance for the book to be good, beloved, and have eager fans. Nobody is arguing that.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Drew Smith said:


> So what should the Outlander books be called?


I haven't read the books so this is conjecture on my part after skimming the plot summaries of books 1-3 on Wikipedia, but it sounds like Book 1 (Outlander) is Historical / Time Travel Romance and subsequent books in the series are Historical / Time Travel Fiction with a STRONG romantic element.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Drew, I haven't read the books and I'm not watching the series, so I can only speculate. From my understanding, though, Jamie and Claire do get their HEA at the end of the first book (they're together), so I'm not sure which rules you think have been broken? There're are only two in Romance. 

As for not getting smacked down? She has over 500 1- and 2-star reviews. Plenty of readers have apparently felt it wasn't their cuppa tea. But a lot of people love it, too. Trust me, readers will "smack down" traditionally pubbed books just as quickly for not having a HEA. There's not some plot to "punish" indie authors. However, you generally have the HEA with trad-pubbed books because, say what you will about New York, publishers who've published hundreds of books in a genre have an idea of reader expectations for said genre. Sometimes they've got their heads up their collective tail ;-) , but there's a reason that mysteries end with the detective finding out whodunnit and Romances end with the couple getting together.


----------



## bobbic (Apr 4, 2011)

CrystalKay said:


> I wanted to write a romance with a little more meat. A little more literary.
> 
> Maybe we can figure it out together.


I read NIGHTS IN RODANTHE by Nicholas Sparks last night, and was thinking about this thread. His books don't follow the usual genre conventions of romance, yet they are marketed as "love stories." I guess some would say that his are literary because of that. I know that some think his books are not great, but somebody's liking and buying them, and several have been made into movies, so there's that. This is the one one of his that I've actually finished, but have heard that they are all pretty much the same plot. In this one, there was cheating by the ex-husband of the MC, before she met the "hero."

I don't have any great epiphanies, but just thought I'd mention it.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

I've only been half skimming this thread for the past few days as I'm not heavy romance reader, but after reading it, it occurs to me that maybe I should take my "relationship novel" (that got bad reviews from people expecting standard romance) and write a sequel including a more traditional HEA for the characters. A two- or three-year time jump could do the trick.


----------



## Adrian P (Aug 5, 2014)

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I have gotten beaten up by reviews in the past where there was cheating involved and the H/H wasn't likeable. It didn't matter that I redeemed the characters. Some people don't make it far enough to appreciate the redemption. If they don't like the character they stop reading and give you a lousy review.
> Lesson I learned? Pay very close attention to whether the H/H is likeable or at least relatable. And romance readers tend to consider cheating a deal breaker. No exceptions. That being said, I love writing damaged and flawed characters and redemption stories excite me, so I won't stop writing them just to please the few readers who won't see it through.


What is H/H?


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

While I do understand the points being made here, I guess my point is that while I'm all for educating people in genre conventions, the convention is HFN *OR* HEA. They're two different things, and you only need one to make Romance readers happy. They want to see the hero and heroine get together in the end. When we're talking about resolutions, that's the only important thing. I think this thread has veered into "overdetermining the genre" territory. I don't believe for a minute that a reader who wants a happy ending where the hero and heroine overcome obstacles to be together is going to be dissatisfied because another story could be written about them. 

Reader expectations are a vital thing to be aware of, but I think the lines in the sand are being drawn far to deep here. IMO the bigger issue is would-be Romance writers not really understanding that romance really is about the couple and the relationship - that it takes precedence, and that everything else is there to serve it. 

But this is just my .02 -- just offering another reader's perspective on Romance endings.  Granted, I haven't been reading Romance since the 80s or 90s. My perspective is from about the 2000s onward.

eta: also pointing out that I do think there is a more "militant" strain of Romance readers, definitely, who like to 1-star things that don't fit their expectations. Plenty of books have a slew of one stars from what I tend to see as a very vocal minority. That said, it's also fruitful to look at a book's place on the charts.... People who are unhappy are always louder than those who are satisfied. (Case in point: serials.) 

Romance is a wide, diverse genre with a lot of very different expectations and readers, as seen in this thread. Plus, I think expectations of the more established readers of romance clash with those of the newer, post-50 Shades class of readers. You can't please everyone. Write a damn good story with respect for the HFN/HEA and - most importantly - respect for the genre and it's readers, and you'll be fine.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Adrian P said:


> What is H/H?


Hero/heroine. Also sometimes referred to as H/h. In other words, "the couple."


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

DianaGabriel said:


> While I do understand the points being made here, I guess my point is that while I'm all for educating people in genre conventions, the convention is HFN *OR* HEA. They're two different things, and you only need one to make Romance readers happy. They want to see the hero and heroine get together in the end. When we're talking about resolutions, that's the only important thing. I think this thread has veered into "overdetermining the genre" territory. I don't believe for a minute that a reader who wants a happy ending where the hero and heroine overcome obstacles to be together is going to be dissatisfied because another story could be written about them.
> 
> Reader expectations are a vital thing to be aware of, but I think the lines in the sand are being drawn far to deep here. IMO the bigger issue is would-be Romance writers not really understanding that romance really is about the couple and the relationship - that it takes precedence, and that everything else is there to serve it.
> 
> But this is just my .02 -- just offering another reader's perspective on Romance endings.


Absolutely, HEA or HFN. Doesn't have to be marriage with 5 babies. They just have to be together in a satisfying way. A believable way. 
As to the follow up books with the same couple, I am not a fan of them. But if the first book can be read as it is and it has a HEA/HFN, with no cliffhanger or no threads laying around all over the place, then if some want more of that couple, I guess go for it. I wouldn't read it. I get annoyed when I like the first book, its romance and then I see another come out by the same author, I hope for another couple, maybe a character we got to know already, I get exited and then I find out its just a rehashing of the same couple. Making up some drama to stretch out their story. And to me that is a fairly recent issue. 
I also don't like the followup book that are the same book basically just from the other persons POV. But those are just the same story one already read, not a different one. Also a recent thing popping up. Just a rehash.

As to Outlander, I read them. Well I read 5, not all. I think the author herself doesn't really call them romance either. Here is the thing. Jamie and Claire are many folks favorite romantic couple. They have an epic love story. The first book, Outlander can be read as a stand alone if one wants. To I guess technically it could be called a romance. The rest of the books I think would be more like a historical saga. When I was a girl my mother got me the Angelique series. That is what got me started on loving historical romance. But the Angelique series is not romance, its historical saga in the way Outlander is. No time travel. But there too is a romantic couple many people loved.

And no offense, I think it was Drew talking about how Outlander doesn't get the reviews an indy would get. No indy compares to the Outlander books, sorry. No publisher books compare to them. They are by now a timeless classic, around for what, 23 years? They have an epic couple. They also have a lot of other stuff going on. I wish there wouldn't be this need to pull out some epic books and then try to compare them with new indy writers. Its not necessary. 
And by the way, plenty don't like Outlander. Just like any other books, some love them, some don't. 
I don't read the Outlander series as romance. I read them as historical time travel with strong romantic element. A historical saga. But they really are very unique so not much to compare it too.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

As usual, great points, Atunah -- agreed on all counts.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

bobbic said:


> I read NIGHTS IN RODANTHE by Nicholas Sparks last night, and was thinking about this thread. His books don't follow the usual genre conventions of romance, yet they are marketed as "love stories." I guess some would say that his are literary because of that. I know that some think his books are not great, but somebody's liking and buying them, and several have been made into movies, so there's that. This is the one one of his that I've actually finished, but have heard that they are all pretty much the same plot. In this one, there was cheating by the ex-husband of the MC, before she met the "hero."


Nicholas Sparks does not write traditional / genre Romance, and he'd be the first one to tell you so  There's a huge difference between a love story and a traditional, Genre Romance; they aren't the same.

And that said, of course Nicholas Sparks has a HUGE following and there's nothing wrong with his books. Not being a traditional, genre Romance isn't a bad thing, it just is. There's nothing wrong with Alice Springs chicken either (love it!) even though it's not steak


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I'll admit I'm somewhat perplexed about what on earth in this thread could have caused someone to feel so strongly about this thread that they decided they needed to bow out or risk saying something hurtful. A friend of mine pointed me to another discussion in which some people seemed to feel that readers shouldn't comment on issues if they don't have practical experience in it. Aside from the fact that I think readers of Romance (especially when said readers have read hundreds of books across the genre over a span of years) are immensely qualified to weigh in on genre conventions, I figure I'll go ahead and list my "qualifications," though I've never felt the need to do so before.
* English education major with a concentration in library science (so I have actually studied the classification of books by genre and demographic)
* Professional editor for over four years with clients who include USA Today and NYT bestselling authors of Urban Fantasy, Urban Fantasy Romance, and straight-up Romance, both indie authors and traditionally published authors and hybrids
* Reviewed for The Romance Reviews
* Member of the Romance Writers of America, which has been a voice for Romance for writers for thirty-five years
* Reader of Romance novels for about thirty years now (boy, that makes me feel old  )

Now that that's out of the way, I'll conclude by saying that NOBODY, certainly not me, has been trying to tell authors they need to change the stories they're writing. Obviously if you're selling and people are enjoying your books, then you're in good shape. What I have been trying to do is educate people about genre Romance and why CORRECT classification of books is important for both authors and readers. At any rate, if I've offended anyone, I apologize--that certainly wasn't my intent.


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I'll admit I'm somewhat perplexed about what on earth in this thread could have caused someone to feel so strongly about this thread that they decided they needed to bow out or risk saying something hurtful.


I can't imagine anyone getting that worked up about this thread either. And you certainly did not need to list your qualifications IMO. You have an opinion and you shared it. I happen to share your opinion but that doesn't mean if someone disagrees with me I'm going to flip out.

And you definitely didn't need to apologize.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I'll admit I'm somewhat perplexed about what on earth in this thread could have caused someone to feel so strongly about this thread that they decided they needed to bow out or risk saying something hurtful. A friend of mine pointed me to another discussion in which some people seemed to feel that readers shouldn't comment on issues if they don't have practical experience in it. Aside from the fact that I think readers of Romance (especially when said readers have read hundreds of books across the genre over a span of years) are immensely qualified to weigh in on genre conventions, I figure I'll go ahead and list my "qualifications," though I've never felt the need to do so before.
> * English education major with a concentration in library science (so I have actually studied the classification of books by genre and demographic)
> * Professional editor for over four years with clients who include USA Today and NYT bestselling authors of Urban Fantasy, Urban Fantasy Romance, and straight-up Romance, both indie authors and traditionally published authors and hybrids
> * Reviewed for The Romance Reviews
> ...


I think the issue is that there are a certain group of writers who write romance in a way that's different than perhaps the more rigorous standard definition. They've looked at best-sellers, thought they understood the genre, had a definition for themselves an identity. Then someone comes along and says -- however rightly or wrongly -- you aren't part of this group, you are not what you think you are and furthermore claiming that you are romance is upsetting to readers.

That could be distressing.

Ultimately, I understand both sides of the issue, but that doesn't mean that I don't see how someone might get emotional about it. It's a personal topic. It's like if I spent my whole life as a rock musician and suddenly someone said because I didn't use power-chords I wasn't a rock musician at all -- even though there are a lot of other people out there calling themselves rock musicians and not using power-chords, or calling themselves "rockers" instead of rock-musicians or some other vaguely similar term.

EDIT: 
Or vice-versa. All of a sudden a group of tambourine players are coming on the scene claiming to be rockers, and you just don't get. Rock has an electric guitar and a nifty tune. There is no place for the tambourine! You feel as if your understanding of the genre and the world is violated, and what's worse is that they're adamant that not only are they "rockers" but that the tambourine is what readers want. You might feel left-behind, and annoyed that something you like is changing in a way that violates it's integrity.

Both of these are personal topics

I don't think anyone went into this with intentions to hurt feelings or anything else. I think it's just two different people with different opinions about a very personal topic. I can see how that could cause friction.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Anne Victory said:


> Drew, I haven't read the books and I'm not watching the series, so I can only speculate. From my understanding, though, Jamie and Claire do get their HEA at the end of the first book (they're together), so I'm not sure which rules you think have been broken?


Nah, Claire leaves Jamie at the end of book 1 and goes back to her modern-day husband.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Nah, Claire leaves Jamie at the end of book 1 and goes back to her modern-day husband.


Nope, that is incorrect. They are together and end of book one. I really don't want to say more without spoiler tags.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Atunah said:


> Nope, that is incorrect. They are together and end of book one. I really don't want to say more without spoiler tags.


Thanks, Atunah! I just finished book 8, and it's been 20 years since I read book 1, so thanks for correcting my confusion!


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

I do want to back up whoever said that even Diana Gabaldon does not consider her Outlander books romance. There is even a part within the book where a character thinks to herself something like, "If this were a romance, then thus and such would happen."


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Atunah said:


> Nope, that is incorrect. They are together and end of book one. I really don't want to say more without spoiler tags.


Whoa! I just finished re-reading #1, and for a minute I wondered if I forgot a chapter! Thanks for posting this.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Cherise Kelley said:


> Thanks, Atunah! I just finished book 8, and it's been 20 years since I read book 1, so thanks for correcting my confusion!


I read the first in 2008, so I was much later then most. . Now where I get muddled up is 2 and 3, because I read those back to back with no stopping. They kind of have to be read like that. So in my mind, those are one big book. 
So be warned anyone starting the second Dragonfly in Amber. Make sure you have Voyage lined and and have frozen dinners lined up.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I'll just go out on a limb here and say that I was very "meh" about the one and only Outlander book I read (the first), for most of the reasons mentioned above!

1) The cheating.

2) The serial deal; lack of a clear ending. (Slogged my way through one very long book; the thought of reading a whole bunch more? No, thanks. I much prefer to have a couple's story wrapped up in one book.)

3) All right, I didn't like the heroine. I thought she did that stupid suspensey-novel-heroine thing, where the hero says, "Don't go near the snake pit!" And Our Stupid Heroine thinks, "Know what I think I'll do? Go check out that snake pit!" Plus, sorry, thought she was witchy. (People have said this about one of my heroines too, so it's fair to say, I think. Just as we don't all like the same people in real life, we don't all like the same characters in books.) Loved him, her not so much. 

4) Too much angst and bad things happening that upset me a lot. Not what I read romance for. Again, personal taste.

That said, well-written? Yeah, of course. Well-researched? Ditto. Just not my cup of tea.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I have had my issues with Claire too. That is the downside for me when something is in first person. But holy moly are those books page turners. First 3 for me. 2nd and 3rd especially. 4th, I want to hit my head against the wall again and again when I read that.  

What I found amazing though was that Outlander was I think the first book I read on my first Kindle in 2008, my beloved sparkly unicorn magic bar kindle 1. I could not believe how fast I read that first book. What are there, like 20000 locations or something?  . I was just in awe how much faster and more comfortable I could read. I could finally read without squinting. I only read a handful of books in the 5 years prior because of eyes and other issues. So I always have that spot in my heart for it as I christened my first kindle with such a tome. 

Heroines are a very iffy thing for me. I fully admit I am harder on them than on my heroes when I read. I can't explain it, I have no reason for it. It just is. So when I read a romance where I really really like the heroine, I am so giddy. There are a few I fell head over heals for.  

Sorry, I think we got off topic with all the Outlander talk. I blame the Mangoritas I been drinking tonight.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Atunah said:


> I have had my issues with Claire too. That is the downside for me when something is in first person. But holy moly are those books page turners. First 3 for me. 2nd and 3rd especially. 4th, I want to hit my head against the wall again and again when I read that.
> 
> What I found amazing though was that Outlander was I think the first book I read on my first Kindle in 2008, my beloved sparkly unicorn magic bar kindle 1. I could not believe how fast I read that first book. What are there, like 20000 locations or something? . I was just in awe how much faster and more comfortable I could read. I could finally read without squinting. I only read a handful of books in the 5 years prior because of eyes and other issues. So I always have that spot in my heart for it as I christened my first kindle with such a tome.
> 
> ...


Heroines & heroes--that's something I've noticed as an author. Heroes get a pass on almost everything (though my guys are always pretty good guys), as long as they are crazy about the heroine. I had one who kept trying to fight his feelings, and some people hated that. But that's pretty much the one-and-only quality they need!

Heroines, however--that's a different story. I think because, as readers, we want to identify with the heroine. So we're always thinking, "Would I do that/react like that/feel that way?" And if not, even if the heroine's actions/thoughts make sense FOR HER, we're much more critical of them.

At least that's my takeaway after lots of reviews and lots of mulling over this difference.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Rosalind James said:


> Heroines & heroes--that's something I've noticed as an author. Heroes get a pass on almost everything (though my guys are always pretty good guys), as long as they are crazy about the heroine. I had one who kept trying to fight his feelings, and some people hated that. But that's pretty much the one-and-only quality they need!
> 
> Heroines, however--that's a different story. I think because, as readers, we want to identify with the heroine. So we're always thinking, "Would I do that/react like that/feel that way?" And if not, even if the heroine's actions/thoughts make sense FOR HER, we're much more critical of them.
> 
> At least that's my takeaway after lots of reviews and lots of mulling over this difference.


And that is the thing though, I never try or do identify with the heroine. I never put myself in her shoes so to speak. I don't read that like. I never have. I am always observing all the characters. I feel all their pain, the joy, the confusion. But I am not in the heroine. I never have been that romance reader, never been a body snatcher so to speak. I don't know if that is common or not.I think maybe for me its because after reading romance for a long time and reading a lot of it, heroines can have some more annoying traits than the heroes often don't have. Now some of that is probably because I read heavy in the historical sub genre, but I am not sure exactly what it is. I might have to think about that more someday. 
But I have never been one to get in the "body" of the heroine. Ewwww. That sounds really icky. . But I hear that a lot when folks describe romance and they seem to think that all of us women readers put ourself in the heroines shoes. I don't, never have. Am I alone in that? I experience books on a more internal level. As a whole. The characters are separate from me, but I can have feelings towards them. From dislike to crush. From sadness to joy.

I think I need another Mangorita. . This is too deep.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Drinking would probably help me, LOL. Hmm, that's so interesting. Writing them--weirdly, I identify more with the *hero* when I write than with the heroine. Not in an icky way, not in, ahem, certain situations. But I "feel with" my hero at least as much as with my heroine. Wonder why? Do not know.

I'm guessing that, as mentioned above, readers are different, and probably identify in different ways. I don't think that necessarily means "being in the body" of the heroine, maybe just that, as women, we tend to empathize with heroines in the same way that we empathize with our friends and sisters when they talk about their lives.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

jswww said:


> Like I said a few pages back, I don't care where people put their books.
> 
> That said, my posts have been made with the intent to explain why some readers are going to be upset at finding unhappy ending books labeled as romance. I know what I like and I know what my friends like in a romance. It isn't unhappy endings.
> 
> ...


There's not really much to add this. And I get that it's a touchy subject, or it can be. But the original post asked where readers draw the line between Romance and Women's Fiction. So I feel like indies are asking about genre classifications and then when readers and writers who have an informed opinion (and by informed I mean people who have been reading / writing Romance for a while and not just looking at recent trends)--people who love the genre--try to explain what it is that makes the genre what it is, we're getting told (or this is how it comes across) 
a) We don't know what we're talking about
b) We're flat-out wrong
c) We're old and out of touch and the Romance genre is changing for the better, by God

And yet in spite of all this, I see thread after thread about why people are leaving 1-star reviews over serialized Romance. To use the Sylvia's example, it's more like a group who uses tambourines and acoustic guitars and billing themselves as heavy metal being surprised that when they open for Metallica, those fans are disappointed. Those fans might have liked the group just fine if they'd known what to expect, ya know?

And I'm going to repeat, again, that I'm not--and I don't think anyone else is, either--trying to say that serialized Romance is bad or anything of the sort. If your readers are enjoying what you're writing, then you're doing something right. But making sure that you're connecting with readers who want what you're selling and letting people know that they aren't going to be discovering the next Def Leppard will go a long way toward avoiding unhappy, disappointed readers.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Atunah, you're not alone  I've never judged the heroine by what I would do. Well, not most of the time  And I find myself rooting for and "liking" characters for all sorts of reasons. I think my usual reading experience is like meeting people Some I'll like and some I won't, but I judge them on their own merits and how their personality meshes with mine. 

Rosalind--I completely agree. I also hate when the heroine does the exact opposite of what the hero says to do just to show that she's a strong woman and he's not the boss of her. That's not being a strong woman--toddlers do that 

But I also agree that the more the hero adores the heroine and the more he supports her and sticks up for her means the more crap I'll let him get away with before I start wondering why she likes him


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

I'm with Rosalind on Outlander, particularly the snake pit comment. It's always been my understanding that the author doesn't consider it a Romance and in fact I even got the idea somehow that she was insulted to have it classified as such (if so, I bet she changed her mind a few million dollars ago). It's not my idea of a Romance, but admittedly I didn't finish the first one. I got past the beating but just gave up at some point past that. Thought I'd take a peek at the end and see how it came out and ended up at a torture scene that turned my stomach, and that was the end of that. Didn't like her. Didn't like him. Didn't like the story.

As to genre classification my guess is at some point there's going to have to be a break in Romance classifications so that those of us who have expectations of what a Romance should be can separate out what we want from the "innovative" and different ones. As someone who got a good taste of what the anti-indie crowd can be like 4 years ago, my guess is that lot will also use the whole thing as one more excuse for why they avoid indie authors - because we're so ignorant we don't classify our inferior offerings properly.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> There's not really much to add this. And I get that it's a touchy subject, or it can be. But the original post asked where readers draw the line between Romance and Women's Fiction. So I feel like indies are asking about genre classifications and then when readers and writers who have an informed opinion (and by informed I mean people who have been reading / writing Romance for a while and not just looking at recent trends)--people who love the genre--try to explain what it is that makes the genre what it is, we're getting told (or this is how it comes across)
> a) We don't know what we're talking about
> b) We're flat-out wrong
> c) We're old and out of touch and the Romance genre is changing for the better, by God
> ...


Well, I'll clarify that I don't think any of you are old or out of touch or your opinions are invalid at all and I totally agree with the find your fans thing.  I have nothing but admiration for all of you guys and romance readers -- even if they're not my readers -- or won't ever be. You guys really are a font of wisdom. I think it's just hard to get my head around the cognitive dissonance of what I see working now for big names and the expectations people might have for small ones. But what's that saying -- you can't break the rules until you know them.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

As another thought (I'm full of them tonight...) Of course Romance is changing. Romance always changing. That's why bodice-rippers have lost their appeal, heroines are single moms, have sex before marriage, own their own businesses, any number of things. But the one thing that stays the same is the HEA. Without the HEA, a Romance isn't a Romance--it's women's fiction or general fiction or any number of other genres. You can change a lot of things in Romance; it's one of the broadest and most encompassing genres out there. But taking the HEA out is like ripping the heart out of the genre.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

ellenoc said:


> As to genre classification my guess is at some point there's going to have to be a break in Romance classifications so that those of us who have expectations of what a Romance should be can separate out what we want from the "innovative" and different ones. As someone who got a good taste of what the anti-indie crowd can be like 4 years ago, my guess is that lot will also use the whole thing as one more excuse for why they avoid indie authors - because we're so ignorant we don't classify our inferior offerings properly.


I am not anti indy and I don't use the avoidance as an excuse, it has become a fact for me. Now I know what you write, I know some of what you like reading as we hang out on the same reader thread, so I would trust you to know what romance is. That is just based on your posts and on what you write. I also trust Courtney Milan. Tess St. John, etc. I trust that you and they know what romance genre means. But out in the unknown, I can trust the publishers. I know that if Avon puts out something in the romance genre, its romance. If Sourcebooks, Loveswept, Crimson, etc put something out under romance, its romance. 
With indy authors, I just don't have that trust, unless like you and others I see them posting here, or I get recommendations from other romance readers about a specific book. Which has happened a few times in our historical romance thread in the book corner we both hang out in. For me, it was easier years ago. I remember one of the first indy authors I read was Gertie (Margaret Lake). Poster from around Kboards. It never crossed my mind at the time in 2008 to have to worry about if romance will be romance.

Now, that is a very different question I have to ask myself, every time I look for something to read. So for now, I rely on other reader recommendations. And if they have an indy they liked and recommend, I trust them and try it. But I have to be much more careful.

And to be perfectly honest, there are many indy authors that do not classify their books correctly. That is what caused me to be so careful now. I got burned.

And lets also be clear, I have found some fantastic romance in indy land. I'll talk about those freely and happily. I just ask for awareness for the genre. And most of all respect for it and us the readers.

And you my dear are up next on my TBR list finally.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> Well, I'll clarify that I don't think any of you are old or out of touch or your opinions are invalid at all and I totally agree with the find your fans thing.  I have nothing but admiration for all of you guys and romance readers -- even if they're not my readers -- or won't ever be. You guys really are a font of wisdom. I think it's just hard to get my head around the cognitive dissonance of what I see working now for big names and the expectations people might have for small ones. But what's that saying -- you can't break the rules until you know them.


Thanks, Sylvia  Any particular examples? I'm happy to yak about it  If you're thinking about stuff like Fifty Shades--I know that it attracted a lot of people who "don't normally read romance" (their words, not mine). And maybe it's that difference that let them enjoy it. Who knows? It's definitely got its fans. I'm not knocking it. And a lot of books that aren't Romance sell quite well 

Ellen, a lot of people are anti-indie. That's true, just like it's true a lot of indies don't put their books in the correct genre, don't edit their books, don't do this, don't do that, blah blah blah. But a lot of indies DO put out quality books. A lot of the naysayers about indies have no idea what they're talking about, or they've been unfortunately burned and once bitten, twice shy :-(


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

I'm really surprised at the turn this thread took. I had approached this whole thread as a lively and friendly debate among readers and writers about genre expectations, that's all -- and my sincerest apologies if what I said offended anyone. I like to think and write through these things in discussion, and sometimes, I know I may come across as more definitive than I really mean to be. I love talking about this genre.



Anne Victory said:


> There's not really much to add this. And I get that it's a touchy subject, or it can be. But the original post asked where readers draw the line between Romance and Women's Fiction. So I feel like indies are asking about genre classifications and then when readers and writers who have an informed opinion (and by informed I mean people who have been reading / writing Romance for a while and not just looking at recent trends)--people who love the genre--try to explain what it is that makes the genre what it is, we're getting told (or this is how it comes across)
> a) We don't know what we're talking about
> b) We're flat-out wrong
> c) We're old and out of touch and the Romance genre is changing for the better, by God
> ...


Anne, I hope that you didn't get this from what I've posted so far -- I seriously agree with the heart of what you said. I would just also add the happy-for-now ending as being at the core of Romance. I also consider myself someone who loves the genre, even though I'm not old enough to have read it back in the "bodice ripper" days. It's never been my intent to make those readers feel "old and out of touch," any more than I'd like to be made to feel that I don't know what I'm talking about, simply because I come from a younger generation of readers.

I see changes in the genre happening, and I don't think they're any better or worse. They are what they are, and yes, they are probably a result of things like 50 Shades, the shift to ebooks, and changes in the attention spans warranted by new technology. These shifts in expectations are still at the fringes, but they're worth considering as authors enter and progress in the genre.

Anyway, I am truly sorry if what I've said in this thread has offended anyone -- I just wanted to offer another, slightly different, perspective for people wondering about Romance genre conventions.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Just for the record--I've found people's (readers' and writers') opinions on this thread very interesting. I don't take it as "right" or "wrong," more an indication of what's happening in romance, what the feelings are out there. Readers' opinions matter, heck, of course they do! Without readers, I got nothin'. 

(I just write what I prefer to read myself, personally. That seems to work best.)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Hey, girl  I'm not offended, but thank you  I have what's been affectionately called a "strong personality," so I try to rein it in when I get on my pet subjects, and I adore Romance 

And I agree about the Happily for Now, but I do think some people who don't necessarily read a lot of Romance thing that HFN means just a happy ending or the couple is together for now and tune in for book 2, and that's not the same as a Romance readers expectation of Happily for Now. I'm trying to think of a good movie that enough people have watched and I think I'd nominate Sixteen Candles. Sam's crushing on Jake and even though they don't get much screentime together, the whole movie is about them wonder about one another and such. Probably a bit light on the "relationship" for the purposes, but it's the HEA / HFN that I'm after in this example. The movie ends with Jake and Sam kissing. Boy gets girl, girl gets boy. They're 17 and 16 and Jake's about to go off to college so I don't think any of us thought they'd grow old and have kids together, but by god, Sam got her guy and I think every girl who's ever watched that movie loved the ending  But there is no Sixteen Candles 2, no ongoing story. They got their ending. The viewers got their payoff  I would be down with watching SC2, though. Jake was seriously sexy 

But yes--that's my shorthand for agreeing with you. Happily Ever After doesn't mean that literally. It just means the "emotionally satisfying ending." And for most of us that means the couple getting together. The I love you and don't want to live without you. Or I've been watching you all year and will you go to prom with me. But somewhere along the way (probably before I was born) people started calling it a Happily Ever After and that's what stuck. Plus HEA is so easy to write  But yeah. The better way to phrase it for purposes of genre discussion is probably Boy gets girl / girl gets boy (or whatever configuration you've got) 

And I totally agree about being able to talk Romance all day. Love it  Well, genres and demographics in general. I don't get to often


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

Atunah said:


> * * * It never crossed my mind at the time in 2008 to have to worry about if romance will be romance. * * *
> 
> And to be perfectly honest, there are many indy authors that do not classify their books correctly. That is what caused me to be so careful now. I got burned.
> 
> And you my dear are up next on my TBR list finally.


Atunah, I know you aren't anti-indie. I just meant that there is a considerable crowd that are and will use any ammunition to reinforce their position. They're the ones who want Amazon to put us on a separate database so they never even have to see an indie book.

And I'm not defending those who put their books in the wrong genre. I'm sure some of it is innocent, but I think there's a certain amount of deliberate put-your-book-in-the-most-popular-genre-whether-it-fits-or-not attitude. After all, we're seeing in KU with these fake short books the lengths some people will go to in order to scam others and make a buck.

I hope you enjoy whichever one of my romances you decided to try. I got the impression you didn't care for Westerns but maybe I'm remembering wrong. I know you have much broader tastes than mine. The list of what I won't read dwarfs the one of what I will. I put the new one, _Without Words_, in KU at least to start, but it won't be available until 9/30. Don't know if your subscription will go that far before you cancel. Some of mine are in Scribd and Oyster through Smashwords. It's very hard to decide what to do these days.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> Thanks, Sylvia  Any particular examples? I'm happy to yak about it  If you're thinking about stuff like Fifty Shades--I know that it attracted a lot of people who "don't normally read romance" (their words, not mine). And maybe it's that difference that let them enjoy it. Who knows? It's definitely got its fans. I'm not knocking it. And a lot of books that aren't Romance sell quite well
> 
> Ellen, a lot of people are anti-indie. That's true, just like it's true a lot of indies don't put their books in the correct genre, don't edit their books, don't do this, don't do that, blah blah blah. But a lot of indies DO put out quality books. A lot of the naysayers about indies have no idea what they're talking about, or they've been unfortunately burned and once bitten, twice shy :-(


Well, Annie Jacobs is selling pretty well with vicious cliffhangers at the end of her novels. Yeah, she got flack for it, but still selling. Crossfire as well -- I think. Just going through the best-seller list Melody's Anne's Bound ends in a cliff-hanger according to a couple of one-stars. Loking at other "romance" novels on the best-seller list it's gotten to the point where authors announce that their book is a stand-alone without a cliff-hanger. While this shows that romance readers may be craving that stand-alone -- it's also clear that the cliffhanger ending has had enough proliferation for people to need to be told that this romance novel doesn't have a cliff-hanger instead of it just being assumed. Chasing Perfection is another one that looks to have a non HEA "ending", and it's longer than serial length at 160 pages. Cliffhangers are out there, selling.

I also think, like you and others have said(Atunuh, I think) , the Fifty-Shades model got a lot of people reading romance that never read romance before, and so they've got a different -- maybe even incorrect -- paradigm of what the word "romance" means in terms of a book.

So you and others are right when you say this serialization bug probably has something to do with fan fiction. That's a world I spent a lot of time in, and one I have great respect for. Often times writers, even fanfiction writers themselves, bring out fanfiction as if it's something dirty, something less-than, when I think it's a really spectacular thing. It's serialized, community story-telling at it's finest (And absolute worst as well, don't get me wrong. There's a lot of horrible fanfiction out there.). Through fanfiction writers can turn an author's world into a universe, one diverse and teeming with all kinds of species of stories the original author could have never imagined. It gets a whole host of people reading and writing who might have never picked up a book otherwise and returns us to the days where every town had their own version of Demeter or Ra or what have you. (Huge Joseph Campbell fan here!) In it's truest form Fanfiction is giving the story over to the readers. For me there is something magical about that, watching a new narrative be forged in a crucible seething with everything humanity has to offer, the porn, the horribly plotted, and once, every so often, the absolutely magical. (One of my favorites if any are curious is K.L Morgan's Labryinth fanfiction, A Forfeit of Dreams, her prose is just incredibly compelling.)

If a little bit of that chaotic spirit enters the neatly tied up world of individual installments and HEA at the end of every book, for me personally, I find that incredibly exciting. I can see how it might not be for everyone. I totally, totally can. I can see how important it is that we find and develop clear labels for whatever this new beast that is not romance, but also sort of is romance is. I get why you'd want desert at the end of every meal.

Often I do too.

But sometimes not getting the cheesecake the first time around, while at first upsetting, just makes me want it all the more. Sometimes, I don't just want to enter the world of a couple, I want to dive head-first into their universe (not the universe of all of their friends, but *their* universe) , compelled by my need to know the answer to that one great question: What happens next?

But thank god everyone's not like me. Thank god that there are readers and writers who hear this and recoil.

What a boring world it would be if my opinion was the only one. If fan fiction and being a part of a community of readers and writers like Kboards has taught me anything, it is that it is our differences that make this publishing ecosystem truly spectacular.

EDIT:

Just to clarify I see serialized short novellas (what I do) and almost indistinguishable from books that don't have a HEA or HFN, but continue on in a trilogy, no matter their length. For me any story that doesn't have a HEA or HFN /is/ fundamentally incomplete, and so each book is really like a serialized long-form installment. Sorry if I didn't make that clear before. Much the same way some trilogies today like say Game of Thrones really don't have complete stories within each installment. It's very clear at even though these books are very long and involved the story is far from over at the end of each one, and IMHO, we really get nothing close to a resolution at the end of each book.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia, I loved your post--so eloquent. Thanks! 

Firstly--I think a lot of authors are trying to signal to Romance readers that their books do follow the genre conventions of the couple getting together at the end because I think a LOT of Romance readers are gun shy. If they want that <3 ending *, then they're scared to try a new author. Because they don't know if they'll get that emotional payoff. And like I said, a lot of readers of Romance read other stuff too. Lots of other stuff. It's just that if they're in the mood for ice cream, nothing else is going to do.

So for my <3 ending comment... I really think Romance readers may have shot ourselves in the foot by calling the Romance ending a HEA (Happily Ever After). It was called that because of the classic ending of fairy tales: And Cinderella and her prince, Snow White and her prince, Rapunzel and her prince, and on and on and on, lived happily ever after. 

Transplant that to Romanceland and it doesn't mean necessarily that there can't be a continuing story arc. Lord, without even thinking hard I can name ten Romance series in a wide variety of sub-genres that don't wrap everything up at the end of each book. The big bad is still out there, or you want to see the best friend get her HEA, etc. But we do get that couple sealing the deal. And that's the heart of the Romance genre, no pun intended. The idea that at the end of the book, the couple will be together. Like I said, it doesn't have to be forever, it can be as simple as the kiss at the end of Sixteen Candles. 

And I agree that sometimes people do want to keep following one couple and find out what happens next. Nothing wrong with that. Heck, even Romance readers like that sort of stuff. Again, we're not single-genre readers. Most of us read a lot across several genres. We just want to know what we're getting ahead of time. Because I don't know about other people, but sometimes I'm in the mood for something specific. Hubby asked me the other night if I wanted to watch 12 Years a Slave, and I did, but I didn't want to watch it that night. I was stressed out and my poor brain was about to explode. We ended up watching Wreck-It Ralph, which was great. It was funny and it didn't require much work on my part, either emotionally or intellectually (and no, before anyone strings me up, I'm not saying that's what Romances are like  ). A couple of nights later, we watched 12 Years, and I loved the hell out of it. I alternately cried, got angry, got sick to my stomach, laughed, cheered, and cried some more. But I would not have enjoyed it when hubby first suggested it. Not even a little bit. Now imagine that someone had labeled it comedy  

That's the whole thing that has Romance readers being really careful right now--a lot of them fear that if they browse those bestseller lists and grab the #1 selling book in the Romance category that, while it might be a great book, it won't be what they expected / signed up for. And if they did get it thinking they were getting that comedy and they wound up with a drama, they are likely to feel disappointed, misled, downright angry. As Jswww pointed out, that's where irate reviewers are coming from when they cite that they're unhappy about the cliffhanger or feel like they got sold part of a book or it's not a real romance. All these things are symptoms of someone thinking they are getting one thing and then they find out they are getting another.

I would advise any author who notices that they are getting a lot of these reviews not to change their stories or their writing styles--especially when they're selling well!--but instead to signal more clearly that the book falls outside "traditional" Romance. And someone really should come up with a name for it, whether it's Serialized Romance or Saga Romance or whatever, but something that people think represents the sub-genre accurately. That's one nice thing about indies--indies can change on a dime, especially stuff like blurbs. I think if indies started calling it Romantic Sagas or Serialized Romance or whatever appeals, then that would warn away people who aren't looking for that but also signal people who *are* looking for it. Win win all the way around. 

((Edit to add: This is similar to what happened with Urban Fantasy Romance. There has been similar grumbling in the older Urban Fantasy crowd about too much kissy-face in their Urban Fantasy. Billing books like Jeaniene Frost's, Patricia Briggs's, Ilona Andrews's, etc. as Urban Fantasy Romance helped smooth a lot of that out. People looking for something more in line with Harry Dresden can steer clear if that's not their cuppa.))

Anyway, sorry for rambling. It's 3 a.m. and while I'm thankfully not stressed out, I do have the brain-is-mush thing going on. See everyone tomorrow


----------



## AshMP (Dec 30, 2009)

Best definition of WF vs. Romance I've heard (and it's helped me a lot): While a romance novel deals with a woman's relationship with a man (or another woman, or a man with another man, depending on sub-genre you know), women's fiction ultimately deals with the relationship a woman has with herself. HEA or HFN, either way, the crux of the story can have romantic themes, but ultimately it gets tied up with a lesson learned and a new outlook -- this is why you rarely see WF come to the page as a series.

And, as a WF writer, just a friendly word of advice as well:

Just because a book isn't auto-romance, doesn't mean it's WF either. WF has its own recipe just like any other genre, and while similar to romance (in so much as a book can be written and marketed with women in mind), it's *not* romance. Don't drop a book into the category just because it doesn't fit snuggly into romance. WF readers ALSO want to experience certain things in their novels, and they will also get loud if you a disappoint (or think you're misusing the genre) as it's not a "catch all" category of literature than open-arms all books that don't umbrella well elsewhere. If you set out to write a romance novel, before you consider WF as a fall back, maybe the feedback is pushing you more towards revisions?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Good points all around, Ash.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Ok so my next novel series (coming out in January) will be urban fantasy (as I was taught by the people here) but it will have some romantic themes and elements to it. So it needs to be marketed as urban fantasy romance? But there's not a category for that right? So do I just put in the blurb that it's an urban fantasy romance? 
I feel like if I put "paranormal romance" as a keyword it'll end up ranking in PNR if it sells well which means people will get angry that it's not traditional romance like they're expecting.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I would definitely classify it (category / genre wise) as Urban Fantasy, and as you say just make it clear in the blurb that it's Urban Fantasy Romance. If your protagonist is female, that's usually a good signal to readers that it's UFR, too.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I would definitely classify it (category / genre wise) as Urban Fantasy, and as you say just make it clear in the blurb that it's Urban Fantasy Romance. If your protagonist is female, that's usually a good signal to readers that it's UFR, too.


Yeah it's female first person.

But do I use paranormal romance as a keyword?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I wouldn't, but that's just me. As a reader, if I thought I was getting a PNR and it turned out to be UFR, I'd be a bit peeved. And I love both genres equally, but to expect that boy-gets-girl ending and not get it? I wouldn't be happy.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I wouldn't, but that's just me. As a reader, if I thought I was getting a PNR and it turned out to be UFR, I'd be a bit peeved. And I love both genres equally, but to expect that boy-gets-girl ending and not get it? I wouldn't be happy.


Even if it clearly says in the blurb that its an "urban fantasy romance"?

Man it seems like I'm bound by some pretty strict rules here. "Do this so as not to piss off the UF readers. But be careful here because you might piss off the PNR readers. And if you include this then PETA will be down your throat."


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

LOL Well, if it's clearly labeled in the blurb as UFR, categorized as Urban Fantasy, and you're only using PNR as a keyword (as opposed to a category), that should be fine. Because there is a lot of crossover in readership and I think keywords are invisible, they're just used in searches. Sorry I misunderstood  And PETA can suck it ;-)


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> LOL Well, if it's clearly labeled in the blurb as UFR, categorized as Urban Fantasy, and you're only using PNR as a keyword (as opposed to a category), that should be fine. Because there is a lot of crossover in readership and I think keywords are invisible, they're just used in searches. Sorry I misunderstood  And PETA can suck it ;-)


Yeah the two categories I was going to pick was "urban fantasy" and "fantasy paranormal".


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> LOL Well, if it's clearly labeled in the blurb as UFR, categorized as Urban Fantasy, and you're only using PNR as a keyword (as opposed to a category), that should be fine. Because there is a lot of crossover in readership and I think keywords are invisible, they're just used in searches. Sorry I misunderstood  And PETA can suck it ;-)


My intuition says that you'll find more audience in PNR than you would in Urban Fantasy. If you have a cliffhanger warning or some other way to signal that this is an ongoing "saga", then I think PNR is the right place to put it. Urban Fantasy will get you some dudes wondering about why is there so much missy-times. Or worse, not picking up the book at all.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I dunno. I think most of the "Why is there mushy stuff in my Urban Fantasy?" people have realized that there's Urban Fantasy Romance out there and if they don't like that, they're on guard for it. If that's in the blurb and it's a female protag, I think those people will know what it is. Any backlash over people making cow eyes at each other in Urban Fantasy that's labeled as UFR will be less than a PNR that doesn't have that emotional resolution that they're looking for. Although if something truly is PNR and it's labeled as UF, that's a horse of a different color. But far better, in my opinion, to categorize correctly. UFR has been out there long enough that if you label it as such, people will know what to expect. To put it in PNR even if it's not just because there's a romance element would be like putting cupcakes in the candy section instead of baked goods just because there's chocolate icing.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I dunno. I think most of the "Why is there mushy stuff in my Urban Fantasy?" people have realized that there's Urban Fantasy Romance out there and if they don't like that, they're on guard for it. If that's in the blurb and it's a female protag, I think those people will know what it is. Any backlash over people making cow eyes at each other in Urban Fantasy that's labeled as UFR will be less than a PNR that doesn't have that emotional resolution that they're looking for. Although if something truly is PNR and it's labeled as UF, that's a horse of a different color. But far better, in my opinion, to categorize correctly. UFR has been out there long enough that if you label it as such, people will know what to expect. To put it in PNR even if it's not just because there's a romance element would be like putting cupcakes in the candy section instead of baked goods just because there's chocolate icing.


*Shrugs* Agree to disagree I suppose.


----------



## A.C. Nixon (Apr 21, 2011)

I've been following this thread, and whew a lot of great opinions. If someone has a book categorized as a romance, and it doesn't have a HEA/HFN and doesn't warn me, I'm not too happy. Now if I'm warned, and I like the sample, I was warned and will take my chances. 

Personally I prefer each book to get wrapped up, the just break them up in the next book.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> *Shrugs* Agree to disagree I suppose.


See, and okay. You're entitled to that, but--I'm actually fuming a bit about this. Because this is a CLASSIC example of what I and Atunah and Jswww others have been saying in this very thread. And some of this may be putting words in your mouth and for that I apologize, but here you've got a book that the author says is Urban Fantasy Romance and you're saying don't classify it as Urban Fantasy because you might tick off some of the guys in that genre, even though you'd be classifying it correctly. Instead, put it in PNR (even though it's NOT) because it's got some relationship stuff in it (though that is not what makes a Romance a Romance). That basically comes across as an eff you to Romance readers. Because you're basically saying okay to piss off some Romance readers by intentionally miscategorizing a book so as not to tick off readers in the genre it actually belongs in.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> Even if it clearly says in the blurb that its an "urban fantasy romance"?
> 
> Man it seems like I'm bound by some pretty strict rules here. "Do this so as not to p*ss off the UF readers. But be careful here because you might p*ss off the PNR readers. And if you include this then PETA will be down your throat."


An inelegant analogy:

There are two ticket windows. One is for tickets to Bath and has a long-ass line. The other is for tickets to Brighton, and the line is half as long.

I want to go to Bath, but I don't want to wait that long in line - so <light bulb> I get in the line for Brighton! I let everyone in the line know I really want to go to Bath, but who wants to wait in such a long line.

True to plan, I arrive at the ticket counter much, much sooner than I would if I'd stood in that other, long-ass line.

Imagine my indignation, shock, and bewilderment when the ticketmaster won't give me a ticket for Bath! But I _said all along_ that's what I wanted!

*or *​
Imagine the indignation, shock, and bewilderment among those in the line for Bath if the ticketmaster _does _give me a ticket to Bath...


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Anne Victory said:


> See, and okay. You're entitled to that, but--I'm actually fuming a bit about this. Because this is a CLASSIC example of what I and Atunah and Jswww others have been saying in this very thread. And some of this may be putting words in your mouth and for that I apologize, but here you've got a book that the author says is Urban Fantasy Romance and you're saying don't classify it as Urban Fantasy because you might tick off some of the guys in that genre, even though you'd be classifying it correctly. Instead, put it in PNR (even though it's NOT) because it's got some relationship stuff in it (though that is not what makes a Romance a Romance). That basically comes across as an eff you to Romance readers. Because you're basically saying okay to p*ss off some Romance readers by intentionally miscategorizing a book so as not to tick off readers in the genre it actually belongs in.


100% agree. And I am just at this point baffled to no end. This whole thread some of us have been trying to explain and it seems like it just doesn't matter. To heck with romance readers and what they expect in the genre. 
Lets protect the lads from the cooties in case there is some hanky panky in a UF, but its ok to peeve off romance readers for misclassifying?

And again, this is the point I have made earlier in the thread. And I am not alone in that. How can I trust indy authors and if I state so, I get called indy hater by some I am sure. And if I leave a 1 star review on such a mis classified book am I going to be called names? Am I told its my fault somehow?

Sigh.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

What's really great for me with this thread is that I went and added a note at the end of all my blurbs that this was a complete book with no cliffhangers. So thanks very much for the info that that really matters. I know you feel like writers aren't listening, but we really are.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> See, and okay. You're entitled to that, but--I'm actually fuming a bit about this. Because this is a CLASSIC example of what I and Atunah and Jswww others have been saying in this very thread. And some of this may be putting words in your mouth and for that I apologize, but here you've got a book that the author says is Urban Fantasy Romance and you're saying don't classify it as Urban Fantasy because you might tick off some of the guys in that genre, even though you'd be classifying it correctly. Instead, put it in PNR (even though it's NOT) because it's got some relationship stuff in it (though that is not what makes a Romance a Romance). That basically comes across as an eff you to Romance readers. Because you're basically saying okay to p*ss off some Romance readers by intentionally miscategorizing a book so as not to tick off readers in the genre it actually belongs in.


It's not at all an eft you to romance readers, just like romance readers who don't like serialized fiction aren't giving me an eff you when they chose not to read my books. I have great respect for you Anne, and I'm sorry if you think I don't just because I consider serialized romance to fall in the domain of romance.

If there is a HEA/HFN by the END of the story it IS a romance, it's just a serialized romance, whether long form or short form. (Although obviously long form is a little dicier.) I've already made my feelings on serialized romance clear. IMHO. If the HEA never came at all, then maybe I'd say go UF all the way, but my impression is that it doesn't. They way I see it is ask yourself this question: If I read all the books of the series at once in order would I be a satisfied romance reader at the end of the journey?

If the answer to that is yes, put it in romance with a cliffhanger/serialized warning.

If the answer to that is no then don't.

I care about readers, I care about what they think-- I DO! I am listening, believe it or not, but the way I see it is as long as you get the HEA eventually it's romance -- it's just romance /serialized/. It's also not just that you might not tick of the guys it's that it's not the right place for it. Is it a book about the relationship between two people with demons and ghouls on the side /or/ is it a book about demons and ghouls with some romance? Urban Fantasy -- to me -- is about the world, as much as or more than the characters, paranormal romance is about the romance more than the world. If I opened an Urban Fantasy book and found out that most of the time was spent with the main characters having sex and angst about will they/won't they I would be disappointed as hell. If I opened that book in romance, I would be getting what I asked for.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Atunah said:


> 100% agree. And I am just at this point baffled to no end. This whole thread some of us have been trying to explain and it seems like it just doesn't matter. To heck with romance readers and what they expect in the genre.
> Lets protect the lads from the cooties in case there is some hanky panky in a UF, but its ok to peeve off romance readers for misclassifying?
> 
> And again, this is the point I have made earlier in the thread. And I am not alone in that. How can I trust indy authors and if I state so, I get called indy hater by some I am sure. And if I leave a 1 star review on such a mis classified book am I going to be called names? Am I told its my fault somehow?
> ...


First of all, I don't think you're an indie hater -- I think that you have things that you like and expectations that some (certainly not all) in indie-land are moving in a different direction from. Second of all, I am listening, and it's not just about protecting lads from cooties it's about what is this book about. Is this book about primarily about the romance between two people? Yes? Is there a HFN/HEA eventually? Yes. Then I don't logically see how it could be anything else but a romance. I just don't.

I think that if you leave a one-star on a book that wasn't clearly marked you don't deserve to be called names. I think that if you leave a ones-star on a book that even was clearly marked but you read it and didn't like it you don't deserve to be called names. Reviews are opinions you have a right to one. The only issue I have is when reviewers see serialized fiction, clearly marked, and down vote it just because they don't like the concept. I don't like sushi, but that doesn't mean I go around giving one-star reviews to Kora Sushi to get them to leave my neighborhood so a Chinese place I like comes in. You've never done this Atanuh, obviously, but some readers do.

I really don't think you guys are silly or out-dated, and I am listening to you. But listening to someone doesn't mean that I have to agree with them.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

LKRigel said:


> An inelegant analogy:
> 
> There are two ticket windows. One is for tickets to Bath and has a long-ass line. The other is for tickets to Brighton, and the line is half as long.
> 
> ...


It's more like.

I want to London and there are only two lines for Brighton and Bath. I pick the line that will get me close enough to London as I can go. Which happens to be Bath.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> It's not at all an eft you to romance readers, just like romance readers who don't like serialized fiction aren't giving me an eff you when they chose not to read my books. I have great respect for you Anne, and I'm sorry if you think I don't just because I consider serialized romance to fall in the domain of romance.
> 
> If there is a HEA/HFN by the END of the story it IS a romance, it's just a serialized romance, whether long form or short form. (Although obviously long form is a little dicier.) I've already made my feelings on serialized romance clear. IMHO. If the HEA never came at all, then maybe I'd say go UF all the way, but my impression is that it doesn't. They way I see it is ask yourself this question: If I read all the books of the series at once in order would I be a satisfied romance reader at the end of the journey?
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with anything you said. But the author specifically said that it's Urban Fantasy with romantic themes and elements. That's why I had a sudden WTF moment this morning. She basically said it's UF with *some* romance, and you said put it in Romance anyway because it might tick off some UF readers if there's some kissy-face going on. And maybe you didn't catch the part where she said it was UF, that's okay. But if you did, then that's where the "Wait, what?!?" came from.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> First of all, I don't think you're an indie hater -- I think that you have things that you like and expectations that some (certainly not all) in indie-land are moving in a different direction from. Second of all, I am listening, and it's not just about protecting lads from cooties it's about what is this book about. Is this book about primarily about the romance between two people? Yes? Is there a HFN/HEA eventually? Yes. Then I don't logically see how it could be anything else but a romance. I just don't.


But the author SPECIFICALLY said it was Urban Fantasy written in female first person. That's where we had this huge disconnect. She, J Ryan, never said word one about there being a HEA stretched out over three books. HEA was never even mentioned. She said Urban Fantasy as she's come to understand it (with some romantic themes and elements), written in female protagonist first person.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I don't disagree with anything you said. But the author specifically said that it's Urban Fantasy with romantic themes and elements. That's why I had a sudden WTF moment this morning. She basically said it's UF with *some* romance, and you said put it in Romance anyway because it might tick off some UF readers if there's some kissy-face going on. And maybe you didn't catch the part where she said it was UF, that's okay. But if you did, then that's where the "Wait, what?!?" came from.


Knowing Jessica's past work I was under the impression that her book was a romance with paranormal themes that had a cliffhanger ending. If she said otherwise then I agree with you, Urban Fantasy. But knowing what she's written in the past I would be very surprised if it was Urban Fantasy and not Paranormal Romance. Although I will say that I do see a lot of Urban Fantasy looking books hovering about in Paranormal Romance by using keywords to get there even though there main category is Urban Fantasy. That's a bit more of a grey area.



> But the author SPECIFICALLY said it was Urban Fantasy written in female first person


z

I was under the impression she labeled it as Urban Fantasy because it didn't have a HEA at the end of the first installment, and was told because of that that it could not be romance. If she was labeling it because there actually wasn't that much focus on the romance then I'm with you.



> urban fantasy (as I was taught by the people here)


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Fair enough  And I haven't read her past stuff, so I don't know. I based on her original post:


J Ryan said:


> Ok so my next novel series (coming out in January) will be urban fantasy (as I was taught by the people here) but it will have some romantic themes and elements to it. So it needs to be marketed as urban fantasy romance? But there's not a category for that right? So do I just put in the blurb that it's an urban fantasy romance?


And I took her post at face value. That's why when I saw your reply to put it in Paranormal Romance I was just completely gobsmacked


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> Is this book about primarily about the romance between two people? Yes? Is there a HFN/HEA eventually? Yes. Then I don't logically see how it could be anything else but a romance. I just don't.


I was just going to post almost this exact thing. IMO, when trying to decide where to categorize, a fair R/r-omance? Flow Chart is this:

1. Is the focus on the couple and their relationship FIRST and FOREMOST?

2. If yes, will you end each installment with a HFN or HEA resolution?

3a. If yes, then you have yourself a Romance series or serial. Label appropriately and you're done!
3b. If no, then you'd probably better warn about the cliffhanger. A story truly focused on a romantic relationship that doesn't RESOLVE the romantic relationship is, by definition, a cliffhanger. _See 3c._
3c. Furthermore, if No, revisit the question #1 to determine whether this is a big-R Romance with a cliffhanger, or a little-r romance, where the romance plays a slightly secondary role.

4. If it's big-R romance, place it with the Romance, but WARN your readers of the cliffhanger. If it's little-r romance, place it in another appropriate category (urban fantasy, science fiction, women's fiction, etc.), and note the romantic elements/subplot.

I completely understand the frustration on Anne, Atunah, and other readers' parts for feeling burned by indie writers who seem to want to categorize their books as Romance because they think it's the more lucrative genre. That said, this thread has SHOWN that many people truly don't understand why they're not writing a romance -- and that the miscategorizations we see are NOT always attempts to make bank, and are often genuine mistakes.

The truth is that very few books sprout from writers' brains (especially new writers' brains) fully conforming to genre expectations. They have to be wrangled with, to get them that way. And variety is the spice of life. One of the great things about the indie movement, I think, is the new availability of works that DON'T always conform, exactly, to genres constructed, described, and often PREscribed by major publishers. It's fair for indie writers to want to preserve that individuality, because often that's what readers love! But it also means the market is having some growing pains. I do try to assume good faith on the part of writers like Sylvia and JRyan to understand their own (often relatively innovative) work, to try to understand their expectations of readers, and to categorize their work appropriately.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> Fair enough  And I haven't read her past stuff, so I don't know. I based on her original post:
> And I took her post at face value. That's why when I saw your reply to put it in Paranormal Romance I was just completely gobsmacked


This was the post she originally made. This reads as a romance plot to me. There are NO mention of other conflicts, JUST romance.



> Like in book 1 you build the relationship.
> 
> Then in book 2 he does something completely unforgivable and just cannot be with him anymore.
> 
> ...


Then everyone told her here nooooo this can't be romance you don't have a HEA. So, she sticks it in UF, because that's what she was told to do as to not piss off romance readers. I mean we don't have enough information I suppose, but that's my understanding of the situation. I think that's why I grit my teeth when people say no HEA no romance and then people like Jessica who have some cliffhangers think or well I have to classify it as UF with romance elements. Could be wrong, again, who knows, that was just how I read the situation.

By the by NOTHING I'm doing is all that innovative. I'm a shameless hack jumping on the PNR serial bandwagon. Which is why I feel so comfortable with my definitions. I am not even close to being the first person to do this. I would have never done this if I hadn't seen other people do it first.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Yeah probably shouldn't have outlined my whole series. :/ 

PM me for details.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

> The reason I was thinking UF is because there'll be more than just the will they/won't they. She'll be living her life, going to work, mingling with other people in the neighborhood and getting involved in their lives. I was even thinking of including a small mystery in the first book that gets solved by the end.


I aim for a ratio of 60% of the scenes in my books being with the hero, and the whole plot hinges on the romance. If I took the romance away I wouldn't have a book. Can you take the romance away from your book Jessica? Would it still work without it -- with a few changes --. Then I'd put it as UF. If there wouldn't be a story without the romance, then I'd put it as PNR.

*two cents*


----------



## SarahWritesSometimes (Aug 18, 2014)

JRyan - I have no opinion on where it should be placed but I will say it sounds good.  Good enough that the cynic in me thinks you might want to delete your post.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> By the by NOTHING I'm doing is all that innovative. I'm a shameless hack jumping on the PNR serial bandwagon. Which is why I feel so comfortable with my definitions. I am not even close to being the first person to do this. I would have never done this if I hadn't seen other people do it first.


Haha, I hesitated with my word choice when I said 'innovative.' What I mean is relatively speaking, serials are innovative to readers in general, who for the last few decades (pre-modern ebook and pre-KDP) have been presented with what publishers saw as profitable: full length novels and strict genre boundaries. Indies, because they are smaller, have brought this market things like New Adult and serialized fiction, as well as more niche subgenres and cross-genre work, all of which are things that publishers would not have taken chances on.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

DianaGabriel said:


> Haha, I hesitated with my word choice when I said 'innovative.' What I mean is relatively speaking, serials are innovative to readers in general, who for the last few decades (pre-modern ebook and pre-KDP) have been presented with what publishers saw as profitable: full length novels and strict genre boundaries. Indies, because they are smaller, have brought this market things like New Adult and serialized fiction, as well as more niche subgenres and cross-genre work, all of which are things that publishers would not have taken chances on.


For sure. ;-) Just had to clarify. I am the farthest thing from innovative there ever was. I looked at what was selling, what I wanted to read, what I wanted to write and then wrote some combination of all three.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> For sure. ;-) Just had to clarify. I am the farthest thing from innovative there ever was. I looked at what was selling, what I wanted to read, what I wanted to write and then wrote some combination of all three.


Shhh... That's the winning formula!!


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

SarahWritesSometimes said:


> JRyan - I have no opinion on where it should be placed but I will say it sounds good. Good enough that the cynic in me thinks you might want to delete your post.


Yeah I was thinking the same thing actually. I even debated on making the post.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> I aim for a ratio of 60% of the scenes in my books being with the hero, and the whole plot hinges on the romance. If I took the romance away I wouldn't have a book. Can you take the romance away from your book Jessica? Would it still work without it -- with a few changes --. Then I'd put it as UF. If there wouldn't be a story without the romance, then I'd put it as PNR.
> 
> *two cents*


Well no there wouldn't be much plot without the romance. Well there would but I think it'd be kind of a boring story and she might end up dead at the end of book 1 without him.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

All I can say, Jessica, is, I don't write what's in style. Bloggers don't tend to like my books that much. Not enough drama, not enough angst, not enough sexytimes. 

That's why everybody turned my first couple books down, too, at least I guess that's why. If this thread shows anything, though, it's that there's a whole lot more out there than the Hot New Thing. A whole lot of readers left behind by angsty NA or paranormal or whatever serials (Not That There's Anything Wrong With That), or whatever the flavor of the month will be by the time you publish your books. And a whole lot of readers who LOVE angsty NA or paranormal or whatever serials, who are welcoming their entry into the fold with cheers and open arms. The world of readers--call them Romance readers or just fiction readers--is huge. Many readers read across genres. As long as you tell them CLEARLY what they're getting and then deliver a good read that matches their expectations, you can sell books. 

My 2 cents.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> This was the post she originally made. This reads as a romance plot to me. There are NO mention of other conflicts, JUST romance.


Ah. My poor brain didn't even connect the two posts  I think everyone who got completely sideways today did the same thing, just assumed you were replying to that one post. Apologies for that  I blame the Internet--so easy to misinterpret things.

Diana, I <3 you 

JRyan--I didn't see your plot synopsis. Based on what Sylvia quoted (your original post with the quick summation of each book), I'd change my vote to PNR with some language that makes it clear it's a serial. If you want to e-mail me, feel free (an[email protected]) or you can PM me. Like I said earlier, I'm always thrilled to pieces to talk genre and demographics 

By the by--I'm not sure I like "serial romance" when talking about full-length books, cliffhanger endings or no. To me a serial book suggests that it's between 10k and 20k words for each installment, regardless of the genre. Romance saga maybe? I'm quite serious that some thought should be put into this. Coming up with a term that can easily adopted by authors to describe their wares would be immensely helpful in connecting you with your audience and steering people who want the traditional HEA in each installment a different direction.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> It's more like.
> 
> I want to London and there are only two lines for Brighton and Bath. I pick the line that will get me close enough to London as I can go. Which happens to be Bath.


Actually, in that case you need to go to Brighton rather than Bath. 

And in my experience, urban fantasy readers are far more tolerant towards an urban fantasy with a higher romance content (and those dudes who hate anything romance usually don't read urban fantasy either or only read urban fantasy by male authors and with male protagonists) than romance readers are towards a missing HEA/HFN.

In general, serialized indie romances (often paranormal or new adult) are clearly popular, since people are buying them in droves. But I rarely see longterm romance readers as well as romance blogs and sites discussing these books or authors except occasionally to grumble about how they are clogging up the Amazon lists.

So it seems we're dealing with two different readerships here, the longterm romance readers who dislike cliffhangers and serials and a different readership that came to romantic fiction from elsewhere (50 Shades of Grey, fanfiction) and likes serials and torrid angsty relationships with lots of twists and turns.

The problem is that the both readerships and their very different preferences are currently stuck in the same genre.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

This is a very interesting discussion. I've been struggling with romance for the last year and finally taught myself to write it. The thing I've learned about with making heroines likable is to just make them likable. If I make them good hearted, smart, kind, and vulnerable,  I can make them very strong  and independent as well. 

The romance that has ended up doing best for me is honestly written very much like a action thriller. It's a mash up of paranormal and scifi with a very fast paced adventure. Since I know what makes a romance at this point, the adventure plot and romance plot work very closely with each other. I've gotten response from fans saying how much they enjoy the complex world building and exciting plot line. But, it is a romance. The relationship builds along the way and there are some pretty detailed sex scenes. After a year of hitting my head against a wall, I feel like I've found what works for me and I plan to continue to work with exactly the same genre.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> And in my experience, urban fantasy readers are far more tolerant towards an urban fantasy with a higher romance content (and those dudes who hate anything romance usually don't read urban fantasy either or only read urban fantasy by male authors and with male protagonists) than romance readers are towards a missing HEA/HFN.
> 
> In general, serialized indie romances (often paranormal or new adult) are clearly popular, since people are buying them in droves. But I rarely see longterm romance readers as well as romance blogs and sites discussing these books or authors except occasionally to grumble about how they are clogging up the Amazon lists.
> 
> ...


I completely agree. Female author / female protagonist is a huge, HUGE signal in Urban Fantasy as to whether or not you'll have a more hardboiled type like The Dresden Files / Vlad Taltos, etc. or if there might be some relationship stuff going on.

Totally agree about the separate audiences, too. I'd say for now just market as clearly as you can toward the audience you're gunning for, and maybe someone will come up with a catchy term that will stick for this. Because I think it will be easier to create a new sub-genre of Romance or Gen Fic than it will be to convince long-term Romance readers that times are changing and get with the program. And as I said--people read multiple genres. It's not a bad thing


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

Anne Victory said:


> I completely agree. Female author / female protagonist is a huge, HUGE signal in Urban Fantasy as to whether or not you'll have a more hardboiled type like The Dresden Files / Vlad Taltos, etc. or if there might be some relationship stuff going on.
> 
> Totally agree about the separate audiences, too. I'd say for now just market as clearly as you can toward the audience you're gunning for, and maybe someone will come up with a catchy term that will stick for this. Because I think it will be easier to create a new sub-genre of Romance or Gen Fic than it will be to convince long-term Romance readers that times are changing and get with the program. And as I said--people read multiple genres. It's not a bad thing


I'm going to be team the romance tent is big enough for all of us. Because of serials I've started reading all kinds of books I would've never picked up otherwise. Full length books. Books before I would've assumed wouldn't have been for me. I think getting a huge new readership to call themselves romance readers should be something to be celebrated. But hey, if not, if not.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sylvia R. Frost said:


> I'm going to be team the romance tent is big enough for all of us. I think getting a huge new readership to call themselves romance readers should be something to be celebrated. But hey, if not, if not.


I don't disagree completely. But I think clear categorization is necessary. It's not a cage. It's a signpost. If you imagine reading as a huge park with all sorts of attractions, that's a close fit to me. Just because you read Romance today doesn't mean you can't read Fantasy tomorrow. Or even sub-genres of Romance. Maybe you want Western Romance today, but an actual Zane Grey / Louis La'mour type Western tomorrow. Having a map can help. Walking all the way across the park to what you think is the roller coaster only to find out that it's the Ferris wheel is not cool, though. That makes people grumpy.

By miscategorizing authors may get some readers who thought they were getting one thing, but you also lose readers who were looking what you have to offer. That's lost opportunity and dissatisfied customers which could have been completely avoided.

To sum up--there's room for everyone. Just respect readers and deliver a professional product with an accurate description and I think everyone will be happy.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

A lot of books don't fit clearly into a given category. Is the writer doing something wrong? Or is the writer writing the story he/she wants to tell? IMO, it would be a boring world if every single book fit perfectly into neatly defined narrow categories.

Purebred dogs can become so inbred as to weaken the gene pool. Often it is the mixed breed that is the better pet and healthier, too. Add to that the deep love between true mongrel and master that often comes to be.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

I actually see books that should be categorized as urban fantasy categorized as paranormal romance or scifi romance. There is a hint of a romance but it isn't developed at all. I think there is plenty of room to tell more compelling stories in paranormal and scifi romance categories and I'm very excited to explore it myself. Romance is a great genre because it allows you to be people-centric and to have a female protagonist with feelings. But if  you aren't writing an actual romance, where a substantial percentage of the plot is about developing the romantic relationship and there is some amount of HEA at the end, even in a series, it isn't a romance. Romance is romance. If you don't develop the relationship to a "romance novel" level, you should categorize your book as urban fantasy or science fiction. Also, if you aren't developing the external plot to a satisfying degree, you shouldn't categorize your book as science fiction or fantasy, it's just a romance. It's a fine line to put a book in more than one category. Something like Bella Forrest's A Shape of Vampire is a good example of a series that walks that line well (though I've only read the first one). There is a well developed world and a well developed fantasy plot, but it's also very much a romance. Writing books like that is my long run goal. It satisfies me and the reader.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sapphire said:


> A lot of books don't fit clearly into a given category. Is the writer doing something wrong? Or is the writer writing the story he/she wants to tell? IMO, it would be a boring world if every single book fit perfectly into neatly defined narrow categories.
> 
> Purebred dogs can become so inbred as to weaken the gene pool. Often it is the mixed breed that is the better pet and healthier, too. Add to that the deep love between true mongrel and master that often comes to be.


Nobody has said writers are doing it wrong (with regards to the story they are telling). The problem comes when you try to pass off a Heinz 57 as a purebred poodle. And that's nothing against mixed breeds, it's just a statement of fact. Similarly, I think white German Shepherds are cool, but that doesn't mean you can take one in the show ring (white isn't a recognized AKC color).

Again, nobody is saying, "Writers! You can't write these stories!" On the contrary. These stories are selling, and that means people want to read them. That's fantastic. All Romance readers (and readers of other genres) are saying is please let us know what it is you have written. A book is like buying something in a box. You can't see what's in the box--you can only read what's on the label. It's not cool to say your box has Cheerios in it when it's actually corn flakes. Even worse--because at least the corn flakes were still cold cereal--would be if it was oatmeal, which is a hot cereal. Even worse still would be if it had pasta or vegetables or meat in it. You might like all of those things, but what you really wanted and needed was a box of Cheerios.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Anne Victory said:


> Nobody has said writers are doing it wrong (with regards to the story they are telling). The problem comes when you try to pass off a Heinz 57 as a purebred poodle. And that's nothing against mixed breeds, it's just a statement of fact. Similarly, I think white German Shepherds are cool, but that doesn't mean you can take one in the show ring (white isn't a recognized AKC color).
> 
> Again, nobody is saying, "Writers! You can't write these stories!" On the contrary. These stories are selling, and that means people want to read them. That's fantastic. All Romance readers (and readers of other genres) are saying is please let us know what it is you have written. A book is like buying something in a box. You can't see what's in the box--you can only read what's on the label. It's not cool to say your box has Cheerios in it when it's actually corn flakes. Even worse--because at least the corn flakes were still cold cereal--would be if it was oatmeal, which is a hot cereal. Even worse still would be if it had pasta or vegetables or meat in it. You might like all of those things, but what you really wanted and needed was a box of Cheerios.


+1

Anne, I <3 you too!

I get what Sapphire is saying, as I mentioned it above too - the blended/mixed/fringe genre stuff is what's great about the indie movement. But we are at a crossroads where simple categories aren't enough, and authors have to go that extra step to make it clear what readers are getting. And that's ok.

Also, LOL - how many analogies are we up to on this thread?  I say we shoot for a record!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

LOL Good question. Let's see, we've got queues for train tickets, boxes of food, purebred vs. mixed-breed dogs, restaurants... I'm probably missing several, because that's just over the past couple of pages 

On a serious note--sub-genres do develop. Not all the time and not overnight, but it happens. And heck, we even got a new demographic fairly recently  Urban Fantasy Romance is fairly newish--about five, sixish years that it really took off. The world of fiction *does* change, and new sub-genres are developed and named if enough people are writing in said category. Sometimes it's publishers and authors who come up with the name for it, sometimes it's the readers themselves. 

This is not the first time this has happened--UFR is a very recent example. Urban Fantasy readers were pissy that there was kissy-face in their fantasy and PNR readers were ticked that there wasn't enough kissy in their books and there was no HEA (defined as relationship is resolved). Somebody (or a group of somebodys) figured out that it wasn't Romance (no HEA, ongoing protagonist) but definitely Urban Fantasy, and that it did deserve the moniker of Romance as a clear descriptor, just not as the primary genre. And for the most part readers are happy with the distinction so long as publishers don't put the book in the wrong category (which still happens from time to time).

This "new" formula will likely go through a similar process, and I think it's a good thing and a needed thing.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

In the meantime, the question remains, about where an author should categorize a romance saga. (I like that phrase!)


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

Cherise Kelley said:


> In the meantime, the question remains, about where an author should categorize a romance saga. (I like that phrase!)


I am going to commit an Internet sin and quote myself: 

The How to Categorize and Label My Possible Romance Flowchart:


> 1. Is the focus on the couple and their relationship FIRST and FOREMOST?
> 
> 2. If yes, will you end each installment with a HFN or HEA resolution?
> 
> ...


All I'd add is that if you're writing a "saga" (full length novels) then say that they're full length!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Thanks, Cherise  I can't claim full credit. I've been brainstorming with some other ladies 

Absolutely what Diana said. I think, for the Romantic Saga label to take off--and you can do so many things with that--authors will need to do something like this at the end of their blurbs:

Word count / page count if you put it, which I think is a good idea. Word count and locations don't really mean much to readers, but something like this, maybe (tweak to your heart's content):
The Greatest Novel in the World is a the first book in a new Contemporary Romantic Saga. It is a full-length novel, approximately 300 pages.

Or, take a page from Jeaniene Frost's information about her Night Huntress series--this makes it sound not so WARNINGish but still lets you know that it's not HEA with every book. And if this is the type of thing that's up your alley, it will definitely pique your interest.



> The NIGHT HUNTRESS series is an urban fantasy romance featuring half-vampire heroine Cat Crawfield and Master vampire hero, Bones. My heroine and hero have a difficult road ahead of them and they will have to work very hard to earn their HEA (happily-ever-after), so their story isn't over with the first book. Hope you come along for the ride!


----------

