Monday, November 20, 2006

Let's Talk About Sex, Part II

Okay, so it's a day late. But hopefully not a dollar short.

Your responses to the first post on this subject made me want to write a second. However, now that I'm actually writing it, I'm not exactly sure what it was I wanted to say. I feel a bit like a car that has a funny noise right up until you get it into the mechanic's shop, at which point, it stops making it!

However, one of the questions I asked was about the differences between the "genres": romance versus erotica, erotic romance, and romantica. Alice seemed to think there wasn't a difference between the last three. I have no idea, since I've never read anything that fell into any of those three categories! But I have read that one of the distinctions between romance and the other three is supposed to be in how graphic the language is. The more "dirty" words, the more "erotic" seems to be the theory.

The problem I have with that definition is that it seems to me that mainstream romances these days pretty well include all the dirty words, although perhaps at a slightly less frantic pace! In newer historicals, at any rate, c*cks and clitori abound. And frankly, I prefer that to the "manhoods" and "members" and "hoods of Venus" I remember from the romances I read two decades ago.

Another question I had was about whether or not the degree of explicit sex we're seeing now in romances and the related genres will ever ramp back down in popularity. Lacey asked whether there were ever that many sweet, traditional romances. Well, aside from referring to Jane Austen, I do recall the first romances I read were contemporary Harlequins and the hero and heroine never did more than kiss until they were married, and even then, the references were pretty oblique. I got bored of those pretty quickly, but it does seem to me that those kind of stories wouldn't be publishable now except, perhaps, as inspirationals or by very small market presses and e-publishers. I could be wrong about that, though.

Lainey has it right when she says romance is all about emotion. though. I couldn't agree with that more. I do feel, however, that a well done love scene demonstrates and amplifies emotion in ways other types of interactions between the hero and heroine can't. And if it's really well done, a love scene can even heighten, rather than relieve, sexual tension. Which is probably why I like them!

And as of yesterday, I finished writing "the Big One" in Living In Sin. I'm pretty pleased with how it turned out, too. Is it explicit? Oh yeah. Is it emotional? Damn, I hope so. Does it up the ante between the characters? Definitely, but in ways the reader might not completely understand until she gets to the next chapter.

5 comments:

Sarah Palmero said...

Yep, pretty much what Typing Slave said. There *is* a difference between erotica and erotic romance. Romantica's the same thing as ER.

I think, honestly, that the heat will bleed out of the market eventually. Will it go away completely? Well, no, probably not, but I think the current demand for it will die down. Sort of like the demand for werewolves and vampires, or chick lit, is much less than it used to be.

Pam Skochinski said...

Glad we now have the definitions for the different genres --

Congrats on "the Big One". . . and according to your write-o-meter, it looks like you are nearing the end of Living in Sin! Yahoo!

Jackie Barbosa said...

Okay, Jody, your definitions cracked me up! I think at least you've cleared up the difference between erotic romance and romantica, which is that there isn't one. I'm still a little puzzled where the line between erotic romance and romance is, however, because most of the romances I've been reading these days definitely include words I wouldn't want my children using at school (or anywhere else, for that matter!). Maybe it's quantity as opposed to quality?

And Sara, *is* the fad for vampires and werewolves dying down? Given that I have no interest in those sorts of stories whatsoever (apologies to those who like them; they just don't trip my trigger), I'm constantly amazed by how many there seem to be!

And Pam, thanks for the congrats on The Big One. I'm certainly happy to have put it behind me. And yes, I'm definitely getting close to the end, but the end is a bit of a moving target at this point--I really don't know EXACTLY how many pages it's going to take me to accomplish everything I need to. I THINK I've got two chapters left at about 15-20 pages apiece plus a short (2-3 page) epilogue. Obviously, my current target page/word count is that the lower end of the scale.

But it's definitely closer every day, and Lacey and Darcy have been egging me on with their constant positive feedback on the dribs and drabs I send them every day, which helps ENORMOUSLY. I THINK by the end of the month, I should be done. All things being equal, of course!

Humph. My verification work is phuvhu. Sounds like a curse, LOL!

Sarah Palmero said...

It is indeed dying off. A little. Okay, keep in mind that when I say that, I mean in terms of buying. Which means everything that's been picked up lately still has to come out, but, yeah. The shiny has worn off a bit and they're a harder sell.

Pam Skochinski said...

Darn -- 'cause I was just working on outlining a werewolf romance. . . perhaps I should move it up in the To Be Written pile-- before the trend is g-o-n-e