# Dark Romance. What is it exactly?



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

I'm seeing the term "dark romance" quite a lot these days. It's got me wondering what exactly it means and what readership is being targeted. I've used the term to describe a couple of my romantic suspense books, because they contain some dark and disturbing backstories, and nasty villains. A couple of reviewers used the term "read with the lights on."

So, am I right in my use of the term, or does dark romance mean something else--perhaps implying elements more on the erotic end of the scale?


----------



## cvwriter (May 16, 2011)

Dark romance generally contains kidnapping or entrapment, psychological and/or physical abuse, and dubious consent, often because of revenge, a misunderstanding, or a debt that must be paid. The hero is usually an inflicter of most if not all of that. There is a huge audience for it, but no matter how tortured or "justified" the hero is, I just can't get past it to see him as redeemable or loveable in any way.


----------



## Author A.C. Salter (Mar 14, 2017)

I always thought of it to be simular to dark fantasy. It's fantasy with a macabre undertone. Maybe dark romance is romance with a touch of horror.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Ha, I remember the days when Anne Stuart stories were considered "dark romance". Well, we didn't have a specific word for it. I read some recent HR that hailed back to some of the deeper darker tortured stories of time past. Love them. 

What is called "dark romance" now is not something I have any interest in. I followed it, read some and in many many cases, they are not even romance at all. So I don't call them romance. Many are just being thrown into romance to get eyeballs on it. 

Romance has always had many shades of moods and tone. RS and HR in particular can go quite deep. 
There has always been "dark" and still is. I just call them romance. That isn't really anything new though. Some romantic suspense novels can go really really dark. But they are still romance as the genre. Lots of the new kind of "dark romance" are not. 

If you want to give it any kind of name, maybe gritty? I don't know. As a huge romance reader and I think most of us have read a lot, we kind of expect RS to be more gritty more often than not. I just recently read a few that really went places. But so are some from 20 years ago.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

cvwriter is correct. What currently gets called "dark romance" has rape, past and current abuse, often Stockholm syndrom-like attachment between hero and heroine, and generally is in a race towards worst case scenarios including sex with minors, murder and torture. Being banned off Amazon is a badge of honour in this sub genre, instead of a problem.

It is romance however, and includes the basic requirements of a central love story and a HEA.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

cvwriter said:


> Dark romance generally contains kidnapping or entrapment, psychological and/or physical abuse, and dubious consent, often because of revenge, a misunderstanding, or a debt that must be paid. The hero is usually an inflicter of most if not all of that. There is a huge audience for it, but no matter how tortured or "justified" the hero is, I just can't get past it to see him as redeemable or loveable in any way.


I kind of figured I was misunderstanding the term "dark romance" in today's romance market, and now it's confirmed. I'm okay with tortured heroes, but not cruel, unforgivable, or physically abusive ones. So this is telling me my RS are not dark in a way today's reader might interpret it. I'm thinking they're more romantic mysteries . . .

Thanks to everyone for the use of their brainpower.


----------



## dgcasey (Apr 16, 2017)

It's what happens after the lights go out.


----------



## Kal241 (Jan 11, 2017)

In my experience, dark romance is typically the equivalent of Porter's (Mel Gibson's character) relationship with the lead female actress in "Payback." He's a killer, she's a hooker, they argue, may assault each other, and even hate each other, but there's an undeniable attraction between them. I often think of it as a grittier version of Mal Reynolds and Inara's relationship, post-Serenity (Inara proves many times that she is as devious as Mal).

It's not an ideal situation, and the couple often expresses dubious morality, even to each other. Sometimes it works because of that. It's kind of like that saying, "when you find someone as weird inside as you are..."

Basically, diabolical couples. It's one of the few types of romances I write.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Kal241 said:


> In my experience, dark romance is typically the equivalent of Porter's (Mel Gibson's character) relationship with the lead female actress in "Payback." He's a killer, she's a hooker, they argue, may assault each other, and even hate each other, but there's an undeniable attraction between them.


That is almost the relationship between the MCs in my UF, except she's a thief with a vampire fetish. Seems to be a pretty common dynamic in action movies with opposite-sex MCs though. I'm not sure if I'd call that dark romance so much as the type of relationship that happens when those types of people in those types of situations have feelings for each other.


----------



## Kal241 (Jan 11, 2017)

paranormal_kitty said:


> That is almost the relationship between the MCs in my UF, except she's a thief with a vampire fetish. Seems to be a pretty common dynamic in action movies with opposite-sex MCs though. I'm not sure if I'd call that dark romance so much as the type of relationship that happens when those types of people in those types of situations have feelings for each other.


Ironically, my next series has something similar planned: a human female lead, rebel operative, attracted to an alien male on the other side of a conflict. Not quite dark romance, but...I'd call it gray, at least.



LilyBLily said:


> I'm pretty sure dark romance is what was described previously, as a power dynamic with the male usually exercising violent control over the female. Not equality of tackiness.


The reverse also counts: females going 'alpha' on males does exist, but is rarer. The storyline for the movie "Crush" comes to mind.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Kal241 said:


> Ironically, my next series has something similar planned: a human female lead, rebel operative, attracted to an alien male on the other side of a conflict. Not quite dark romance, but...I'd call it gray, at least.


Those are my favorite kinds of pairings, especially when they hate each other at first.



LilyBLily said:


> I'm pretty sure dark romance is what was described previously, as a power dynamic with the male usually exercising violent control over the female. Not equality of tackiness.


We need a special term for equality of tackiness


----------



## LadyDD (Jul 24, 2017)

Glad to see that I'm not the only one kind of floundering. I've been trying to think of where to categorize a book I'm already outlining for next year as well as a current book. So I decided to search dark romance on goodreads and ultimately realized I have a totally different construction and desire when it comes to dark romance. Most of the stories were revenge, abuse, stockholm-esque, involved stalkers becoming the stalked, A Hannibal/Clariece style romance, two gritty morally dubious noir detectives, or some combination there of.

For me Dark romance is like...Heathers sans comedy or like a more psychological Eyes Wide Shut, which I am starting to think does not exist


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Abusive hero.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

LadyDD said:


> For me Dark romance is like...Heathers sans comedy or like a more psychological Eyes Wide Shut, which I am starting to think does not exist


That's not Dark Romance anymore. The genre has shifted there. Dark Romance is now a twin of Dark Erotica. Check these:

*https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/46786.Dark_twisted_abusive_romance_2013_2015*
*
Most Controversial "Dark Romance" (516 books)
*
*https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/42347.Romance_or_Erotica_with_Kidnapping*

That is what people expect when they see the label "Dark Romance".


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

zzz said:


> What is the new name of the genre previously considered dark romance that has been taken over by the bad boys?


Mostly NA, I'd say. And Biker/MC Romance.

Dark Romance these days is really dark, much closer to horror or gore than ever before. It all started off with the *Dark Duet Series* by CJ Roberts, which features the sex trafficking


Spoiler



of an 18 year old virginal girl, how she is broken and trained, and then falls in love with her "trainer". Murder and mayhem, rape and worse ensues.


 At some point during the past five years this got mashed up with hardcore BDSM stories, and now contains stories which one has to consider being splatter. It's quite the arms race. I've seen bestiality and underage content. There's considerable influx from fanfiction, too. There recently was at least one thread here on the forum about such a book.


----------



## LadyDD (Jul 24, 2017)

Nic said:


> That's not Dark Romance anymore. The genre has shifted there. Dark Romance is now a twin of Dark Erotica. Check these:
> 
> https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/46786.Dark_twisted_abusive_romance_2013_2015
> 
> ...


 Yeah I'm aware of that now. At this point these sort of labels have me reconsidering if I'm "really" a romance fan or author. These stories hold no appeal to me what's so ever. I like Bonnie and Clyde romances, not always with HEAs, which I think means they're not technically seen as romances at all, which I think is pretty dumb but that's not what "romance" audiences want.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

LadyDD said:


> Yeah I'm aware of that now. At this point these sort of labels have me reconsidering if I'm "really" a romance fan or author. These stories hold no appeal to me what's so ever. I like Bonnie and Clyde romances, not always with HEAs, which I think means they're not technically seen as romances at all, which I think is pretty dumb but that's not what "romance" audiences want.


I gave up on trying to figure out what romance audiences want. And if you market something as romance and it doesn't meet the expectations, the reviews will tear you apart.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Dark romance is A type of romance. It's not THE type. There are many romance readers, and they like many things. Including strong, sweet men. You do not have to go anywhere near dark romance to be a bestseller even in contemporary romance.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Personally, I don't get the appeal of dark romance, but I have many friends who read or write it. The go to dark romance authors ASAIK are Pepper Winters and Skye Warren (amongst others).

Dark romance usually has the hero abusing the heroine in some way, but it can also be more dubcon bc of circumstances, i.e. he was ordered to kidnap her by his mom boss but instead he decides to make her his bride.

Dark romance is NOT romance with dark/heavy themes.


----------



## Kal241 (Jan 11, 2017)

Crystal_ said:


> Dark romance usually has the hero abusing the heroine in some way, but it can also be more dubcon bc of circumstances, i.e. he was ordered to kidnap her *by his mom boss* but instead he decides to make her his bride.


Bolded the part because I haven't stopped laughing since I saw it.


----------



## BiancaSommerland (Mar 8, 2011)

I enjoy 'dark romance', but I often mentally put it in the category of dark fantasy or horror. I need to be prepared to not have the same...I guess closure you'd get from a romance? I love when authors make it clear with the blurb, cover, etc, exactly what you're getting into. I wouldn't want to pick up an old western and get sci-fi, even though I like both genres.

A lot of books in the dark romance lists seem to change what the genres is, which makes it harder to browse and pick up a new author. I hate that. You tend to only really hear about the books that've created controversy and I've never enjoyed any of those books. Not sure I would be expecting to find suspense in dark romance, but it also might stand out there a bit for people who are tired of shock value stories?

I'm so sooo tired of shock value stories. *sigh*


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

BiancaSommerland said:


> A lot of books in the dark romance lists seem to change what the genres is, which makes it harder to browse and pick up a new author. I hate that. You tend to only really hear about the books that've created controversy and I've never enjoyed any of those books. Not sure I would be expecting to find suspense in dark romance, but it also might stand out there a bit for people who are tired of shock value stories?


Your stories are listed as dark romance/erotica as well. I believe I read two of them a while ago and wouldn't say they are that far from where to the genre evolved lately.

By the way, I agree with those here who feel homeless about their "dark" romance stories which aren't of the abuse/kindapping/torture style, and which at the same time don't belong into either NA or MC/mafia stories. More the thing a du Maurier or Gaiman would have created. I think some of these are hiding away in contemporary romance, women's fiction, romantic suspense and thrillers. Which is understandable now that "Dark Romance" has all but become synonymous with abused and tortured people, rape fiction and gore.


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

If at the end of the book you're making this face...









And thinking, "Well, I guess it's good they found love..."

Then it's probably Dark Romance.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Consider me puzzled: what would the fake smile signify in relation to the story?


----------



## Romantic Pen Editing (Sep 6, 2017)

RBN said:


> In dark romance, the PROTAGONIST(S) are not "good guys." Think mafia, biker gangs, sex workers, criminal activity. The men are waaaaay into alph-hole territory, often unhealthily possessive. Rough sex and dubious consent issues are common, not necessarily in sufficient quantity to constitute erotica.
> 
> I wouldn't apply the label to your RS, based on your description.


I agree. Based on your description, your RS is not dark romance. I would be careful of using the term to describe your books. You risk alienating readers. Readers who are searching for dark romance will be disappointed you did not meet their expectations, and readers who do not like dark romance will probably avoid your books.


----------



## kcmorgan (Jan 9, 2013)

Nic said:


> Consider me puzzled: what would the fake smile signify in relation to the story?


That you're supposed to be happy they got their HEA, but it was with their rapist, so you're not sure how you're supposed to feel about that.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

kcmorgan said:


> That you're supposed to be happy they got their HEA, but it was with their rapist, so you're not sure how you're supposed to feel about that.


I don't like that (HEAs with rapists), so I wouldn't be smiling, not even a fake smile. As an author I think that rape fantasies belong to the erotica genre, and not into romance.

It will never cease to astound me that female romance readers, as a group, pushed for an abolition of the bodice rippers of yore, to the point that most trad publishers won't publish them anymore, and then promptly reinvented them as part of "dark romance" and "BDSM romance". I'd have a really hard time justifying the romanticising of rape as an author. I can see that it is a pertinent part of erotica, but that would mean that the women loving rape fantasies also all own up to reading erotica. Obviously they don't want to do that. Which apparently is why rape fantasies get shoved into sub genres of the romance category.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Nic said:


> I don't like that (HEAs with rapists), so I wouldn't be smiling, not even a fake smile. As an author I think that rape fantasies belong to the erotica genre, and not into romance.
> 
> It will never cease to astound me that female romance readers, as a group, pushed for an abolition of the bodice rippers of yore, to the point that most trad publishers won't publish them anymore, and then promptly reinvented them as part of "dark romance" and "BDSM romance". I'd have a really hard time justifying the romanticising of rape as an author. I can see that it is a pertinent part of erotica, but that would mean that the women loving rape fantasies also all own up to reading erotica. Obviously they don't want to do that. Which apparently is why rape fantasies get shoved into sub genres of the romance category.


Maybe the objection was to the bodice-ripping (i.e., the suggestion of violent sexual behavior) being _on the cover_, for all the world to see. That proclaimed to the world what sort of thing happened in the book. Maybe having the action so overt and obvious was what people (readers?) objected to... sort of like movie posters or trailers that had people balking ("think of the kids!", etc.). Not sure why the cover would make any difference, if the same action happens in books now as they did in the bodice-ripping '80s, but then, I don't read whatever "dark romance" is, so this is just a possible theory on my part.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Jena H said:


> Maybe the objection was to the bodice-ripping (i.e., the suggestion of violent sexual behavior) being _on the cover_, for all the world to see. That proclaimed to the world what sort of thing happened in the book. Maybe having the action so overt and obvious was what people (readers?) objected to... sort of like movie posters or trailers that had people balking ("think of the kids!", etc.). Not sure why the cover would make any difference, if the same action happens in books now as they did in the bodice-ripping '80s, but then, I don't read whatever "dark romance" is, so this is just a possible theory on my part.


If it had anything to do with the cover, Harlequin and Mills and Boon would still publish them. They don't, and you will be hard up finding any trad publisher willing to take on something with rape for titillation. There are a few indie publishers who will accept "forceful seduction", but they are few and far between.

Bodice rippers used to be mainstream, by the way. Not "Dark Romance". I think it was the advent of second and third wave feminism which saw to the disappearance of bodice rippers.


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2017)

Nic said:


> It will never cease to astound me that female romance readers, as a group, pushed for an abolition of the bodice rippers of yore, to the point that most trad publishers won't publish them anymore, and then promptly reinvented them as part of "dark romance" and "BDSM romance".


The initial backlash against the bodice rippers was part of the feminist movement. What we are seeing now is an "anti-feminist" movement with a specific demographic (surprisingly, or perhaps not, concentrated in the Bible Belt) that sees the role of women as almost a martyr in romantic relationships. That men have a "right" to sex and it is a woman's place to provide it for her man. There is a ton of research being done on this phenomenon, which is being driven by the ultra-conservative movement. It is a bit of self-flagellation. These readers believe women are not supposed to be independently sexual creatures, but they want to be sexual creatures, so the romances that they read "punish" women for being sexual creatures and by extension satisfies the need for punishment the reader has. Whereas pure BDSM is ALL about consent, these dark romances deny women the right to consent, which fits with the demographic's worldview.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The initial backlash against the bodice rippers was part of the feminist movement. What we are seeing now is an "anti-feminist" movement with a specific demographic (surprisingly, or perhaps not, concentrated in the Bible Belt) that sees the role of women as almost a martyr in romantic relationships. That men have a "right" to sex and it is a woman's place to provide it for her man. There is a ton of research being done on this phenomenon, which is being driven by the ultra-conservative movement. It is a bit of self-flagellation. These readers believe women are not supposed to be independently sexual creatures, but they want to be sexual creatures, so the romances that they read "punish" women for being sexual creatures and by extension satisfies the need for punishment the reader has. Whereas pure BDSM is ALL about consent, these dark romances deny women the right to consent, which fits with the demographic's worldview.


I agree with this explanation. It meets with my gut feeling about the whole thing. Could you please point me towards some of the more academic research about this? I'm very interested.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

So dark romance is defined by an immoral (amoral), controlling, abusive hero--and perhaps a immoral (amoral) controlling, abusive heroine--who find in each other the way to their happily everafter. There may be rape. There is a lot of sex. 

As Kal241 said up thread, love stories between diabolical couples. Got it. I think . . .


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Nic said:


> I don't like that (HEAs with rapists), so I wouldn't be smiling, not even a fake smile. As an author I think that rape fantasies belong to the erotica genre, and not into romance.
> 
> It will never cease to astound me that female romance readers, as a group, pushed for an abolition of the bodice rippers of yore, to the point that most trad publishers won't publish them anymore, and then promptly reinvented them as part of "dark romance" and "BDSM romance". I'd have a really hard time justifying the romanticising of rape as an author. I can see that it is a pertinent part of erotica, but that would mean that the women loving rape fantasies also all own up to reading erotica. Obviously they don't want to do that. Which apparently is why rape fantasies get shoved into sub genres of the romance category.


That's not what BDSM romance is.

There are about 150 million women in the US. That covers a wide variety of opinions and interests. People who wanted to ban bodice rippers and people who read dark romance are, for the most part, not the same people.


----------



## Guest (Sep 11, 2017)

Nic said:


> I agree with this explanation. It meets with my gut feeling about the whole thing. Could you please point me towards some of the more academic research about this? I'm very interested.


Now you want me to do homework? lol

If you really want to get a handle on the ultra-conservative anti-feminism, try to suffer through Venker's _The Flipside of Feminism_. It is horrifying and hilarious. But it is a good start if you want to follow down that rabbit hole.

A lot of the academic research uses the Oxford study on the psychology of punishment as a launch point.


----------

