Romance, gender, and the measure of a 'real book'
"Why would you waste your talent on writing … that?" Most romance authors have gotten a similar question. (This one came many years ago from a dear friend who has since taken it back, and not because there were threats involved. I swear.) University professors Joanna Gregson and Jen Lois dived into the romance-reading and writing culture a few years back, eager to explore the sociological implications. Here, they reveal what their research has shown them ...
Joanna and Jen: "When are you going to write a real book?"
That's one of the more insulting questions romance writers get asked.
For three years we've been conducting sociological research on the romance-writing community. Our work has taken us to romance writers' conferences, writing groups, and countless author and reader events. We've also interviewed over 50 authors, agents, editors, and reviewers. (We should note that our profession requires us to maintain the confidentiality of our participants, so alas, we can't name the people we talked to.)
One of the most striking things we've observed is how frequently romance authors experience negative reactions to their work. There's a stigma attached to the genre, the people who produce it, and the people who read it.
This probably comes as no surprise to anyone who reads romance. A reviewer of romance books told us, "There are women who read romances who don't tell anybody, who do not share their love of the genre with anyone, because they will take such unmitigated crap for it." Romance readers, she said, are "subject to my favorite line. 'But you're so smart. How come you read those books?' Or my second favorite, 'You do read other things, right?'"
That same negative perception extends to romance authors. As a successful author of paranormal romance (and a practicing physician) told us, "There is a stigma that, first off, romance readers are dumb, and secondly, that anybody who writes for that audience must be of that same intelligence."
Like other forms of women's work, writing romance novels is devalued and trivialized. The writing process is perceived to be easy and the books are described as trashy and formulaic. An unpublished romance writer who had previous success publishing non-fiction books was one of many people who explained to us how the stereotypes are unfounded:
"My fiction muscles are not as strong as my non-fiction muscles. If you try to sit down to write a romance novel, it's hard. It is not easy. And I want to smack the people who say, 'Oh yeah, someday when I have a spare weekend I'll write a romance novel.' I want to stab them with a fork."
The perception that their writing is easy, of little value, and not "real" extends to women writing in other fiction genres, too, suggesting that the stigma is partly about the trivialization of romance, but also an issue of gender. Just last week, Danielle Steel described the sexism she confronts when people compare her work to a hobby, while Jennifer Weiner and Jodi Picoult first made headlines in 2010 for taking on gender inequality in the publishing industry. Simply put: The work women do is still (still!) not as valued as the work men do, whether that work be as writers, in the corporate world, or at home.
The trivialization of the romance genre is particularly curious given the tremendous success it enjoys. Romances sell. They sell a lot. A romance editor at a large publishing house explained:
"The fact of the matter is that romance is like 50% of the paperback market. Everybody who works in commercial publishing knows that. So among the people that I work with, we have nothing but respect for romance because we very much know that it's keeping the lights on."
Despite their significant commercial success, though, romance novels are not seen as "real" books. A best-selling romantic suspense author with over 50 published books told us people she meets often say, "Oh, you write those books. When are you going to write a real book?" Most romance writers we spoke with shared similar experiences.
What makes a book "real"? It's obviously not sales or popularity, because those figures would immediately propel romance to the top of the "real books" charts. To imply that commercial fiction largely written by, for, and about women, such as romance, isn't "real" maintains gender inequality. At the same time, positioning commercial books of any genre (romance, mysteries, or sci-fi, for example) as less real than literary fiction promotes tremendous social class bias.
Perhaps the measure of a real book ought to be the extent to which it resonates with readers. Romance offers stories about arguably the most important things in life: love, relationships, and families. Readers identify with these issues. Just as significantly, sociological research shows that women in heterosexual couples — even those who work full time outside the home — do twice as much housework as their male counterparts (and that's not including child care!). As a result, women are more likely to feel stressed out, pressed for time, and resentful. Romance novels can provide an escape from these and other stressors. A best-selling contemporary romance author explained:
"This is a tough world. There's a lot of stress in our lives. And for women especially, we bear all of this responsibility for family and work and life and home and kids and marriage and friendship. I'm offering a door to an escape where you live in a fantasy world for a few hours."
As we expand our research, we'd love to hear from you. What makes something a "real" book? What will it take for the stigma of romance to disappear? Perhaps most important, how has romance made a difference in your life?
Professors Joanna Gregson (Pacific Lutheran University) and Jen Lois (Western Washington University) have been studying the romance author culture since 2010. In 2011, they received an Academic Research Grant from the Romance Writers of America. You can follow their research on Facebook (Romance Sociology) and Twitter (@RomanceSoc).