I’m actually going to have to contribute to the RWA debate on what currently constitutes romance, if the current definition needs to change, and if so how. This is important and worth my time and brain cells because if the definition is altered to, say, exclude my publisher from RWA recognition status it means no publisher participation at events like RWA National.
Ellora’s Cave publishes romance. Yes, they’ve started a mainstream line and an erotica line as well, but most publishers diversify. Very few only publish one kind of book. Many established publishers sell self-help books and cook books right alongside romance under different lines and imprints. But that isn’t really the issue, the issue is where to draw the line in the sand and say RWA represents THIS kind of book.
Tough job. Romance is broad. I re-read The Thin Woman by Dorothy Cannell recently and if you asked me if it’s a romance or a mystery I would have to say both. The two plot lines seem equally strong and run parallel. You couldn’t leave out either one without ruining the story. Katie Fforde’s books are romance, in my opinion, but they’re called Chick Lit. Jennifer Crusie’s books, although marketed as “women’s fiction” are absolutely romance. Marketing is a fine thing but do we need to let marketing labels disqualify good books, good publishers and good members that are perfectly legitimate examples of romance?
Which brings us to the question, what exactly is romance anyway? Well, if we RWA members can’t figure that one out, nobody can. I’ll be working on my answer because I’m concerned about the outcome.
Recent Comments