In Defense of Romance Reading (Suzanne Forster)

I can’t remember now what triggered the topic for this blog, but it may not even matter because defending romance reading—and popular fiction in general—feels as if it’s become a second calling over the years. I know many of us who read and/or write romance, or almost anything related to the genre, feel that way. I love all kinds of books, fiction and nonfiction, serious and popular, but the only reading I’ve felt continuously compelled to explain and defend is the latter.

I’m at the point of wondering why I should even need to defend it, which in a perfect world, is exactly what I’d like to say to its critics. “I don’t feel the need to defend what I read. Why do you feel the need to criticize it? And, more importantly, have you ever read it yourself?”

I wonder where the discussion would go from there. Probably not very far.

Thinking back, I believe the most recent occasion to climb on the romance reading soapbox was the result of a post by a Yahoo group member who talked about remarks from friends. She reads across the board, enjoying a wide variety of books that include romance, and I loved her answer. “I tend to toy with my friends who claim to disdain romance. They always admit that being in love is the best. And when you point out that romance novelists get paid to write about that, they want to be romance novelists.”

Maybe you have to be a romance novelist to appreciate the beauty of that remark. I tried paraphrasing it, but something was lost. Hope I don’t get her in trouble with her friends.

Another member who’s a medieval scholar talked about how she made use of her education when confronted with someone who trashed genre fiction. She said she had great fun using every bit of literary jargon at her command—and with a straight face. She talked about the philosophy of the genres and their history and the tradition of romance in medieval times. And this was before she’d ever read a romance.

I wish I’d been there. In fact, I told both women I would love to have had them with me when people were being insulting, often unknowingly, about romance novels. Many years ago my husband and I had friends over for dinner, a man who worked with Allan, and the man’s wife. I had only been published a short time, and I was writing Silhouette Desires. They'd just arrived and we were greeting each other, and the man said to me, Suzanne, are you still writing those smutty books? He grinned, thinking that was a great joke, and I really believe he had no idea that it was anything but a great joke. I don't think he meant any harm, but I’d never been confronted like that before, especially by friends, and I had no idea what to say. I laughed along with him and said that yes, I was still writing those smutty books.

I thought that would be the end of it, but Allan took exception to the remark, and with great seriousness, said Suzanne doesn't write smutty books. She writes about true love. Those were his exact words, and he went on to say that the books were about courtship, romantic attraction and emotional commitment between two people. I wasn’t the only one speechless at that point. His friend didn’t know what to say. Fortunately, his wife managed a swift apology. I’m a little fuzzy on what happened after that, but I've never forgotten the incident. I'm not sure I could get away with what Allan did, considering the tone and the gravity in his voice, but no one questioned him, I can tell you that.

It’s occurred to me now, twenty years later, that if I’d really wanted to put him on the spot, I could have said “I write about people falling in love, which is not how I would define smut. How would you define smut?” I’d love to have heard his answer.

I’m always curious how others defend their reading tastes, especially when its romance, so I googled “defending romance reading” and found the mother lode. I loved Nora Roberts’ response to a recent column in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that suggested romance reading could be dangerous to the point of making women delusional.

“Jeez, I’ve been sending a `distorted message’ to women for years by writing about relationships and commitment, about overcoming obstacles and celebrating the discovery and value of love. Thank God somebody clued me in! And all this time I thought the message was love is a vital part of the human condition. Millions of women—who are, of course, irrational, weak-minded and unhappy—have become dangerously unbalanced. Marriages destroyed as they toss aside their husbands in search of fictional characters.

What utter crap.

Neither am I writing female porn. Since when is a novel highlighting two people falling in love, and enjoying each other sexually, pornography?

Oddly, I expect my readers to know the difference between reality and fiction, between pornography and sexuality—whatever their gender.”

We can all appreciate the beauty of this one, yes?

I also found some impressive scholarly responses, including a piece on the salutary effects on younger readers of romance from Kristin Cockerel of the University of Louisville. Cockerel cites many sources, including Jane Radway’s largely positive ethnographic study of romance reading. But as deeply gratifying as it is to have the support of academics, those quotes that come straight from the heart of the reader really struck home with me. In every case, I couldn’t have said it better.

I’d love to hear about some of your experiences. Have you ever been put in the position of having to defend your reading tastes? After my foray on Google, I’m loaded for bear and waiting for the next opportunity. But I’m also thinking it might be fun to turn the tables and call upon the critics to defend their need to criticize. Hey, I’m just asking.

Suz