How Do You Bring Romance to Romances? by Galley 'Ho Santa
What I am questioning revolves around the presence or lack thereof of the actual bloom of romance. The hero and heroine meet, sparks fly, emotions ignite and they end up in bed very quickly and without much preamble. As for me, I miss the romance of it. The ‘aha’ moments that transcend the very physical nature of what many romances today seem to push.
There are also times that when they aren’t in bed, they’re dodging bullets, bounty hunters, spies, dastardly Lords whose pockets bring them to kidnap, lie and extort. So with all this shrapnel and gun powder flying around, when do the hero and heroine get the time to fall in love?
How do we as writers write the romance into our books? What form do you see romance taking in your books?
And, as readers, how much is too much of everything else in the books you’ve read? Do you miss the romance in your romances or have I just hit upon a few wall bangers in the last few months?
Books by the Crew
62 comments:
No, you're right. There is a lot of wall bangers being written. But I've been told over and over again that the H/H have to meet by the third chapter. Better, yet...fall into bed by the third chapter.
Yup, one of those 'rules' I've been told of. "You'll only catch an editor/agent attention if you make it happen fast and steamy..."
I know the books are out there where it doesn't work that way...but they are really out there. I do think you've hit upon a great challenge to writers...how do you do it slow?
Connie Brockway does it. That's one I've read who works it that way...
Hi Santa
I think that to write a 'great' romance requires enormous talent. Thinking of Jane Austen or Georgette Heyer perhaps. When I started reading romances I would pick at random, perhaps attracted by the title or the plot synopsis, and more often than not I found something shallow and frivolous.....your wall bangers. This led me to blogs for guidance on the best authors and I now have a few favourites.
The plot is very important for me, and the skill to develop 'living' characters within a fast moving plot, with humour, sensitivity and an awakening romance, seems to me to be worth more than gold. An author has to be able to touch the depths of my soul and create characters that if real, would have me falling in love, all within a captivating plot that keeps me reading late into the night. I don't think thats crying for the moon!
My latest in this '5 star' category is Jo Beverley with her medieval 'Dark Champion'. I'm very grateful to Irish for recommending this one!
I think lately what I'm writing is much more oppositional, more of a throw-back to those screwball 30s comedies where conversation was all. Maybe it's because I've had so many years of fighting with my husband (*g*), but I'd rather the dialogue be witty than the sex hot. Ideally, you have both, but I usually skim the six page sex scene.
I'm with you on so-so books lately. I think fabulous established writers can get away with the deliciously slow development of romance. But lately it does indeed seem like people just meet and are off to the bedroom.
Great blog Santa! :)
I think the key is sexual tension, not sex. The chemistry between them, the conflict of what's keeping them apart and that they both want to be together. Then once they get together, there has to be something that keeps them emotionally apart.
A lot of books I've read lately just dwell on the sex. But if it's just that, I get bored.
It's possible to write a hot romance without sex, I think.
Hello Friends,
I am so glad to see that I am not alone in my thinking. It's nice to have company.
2nd - I've heard the same thing from, well, just about everyone in the business. Have them meet earlier and get them in bed even earlier, lol. Make it hot and you'll be an auto-sell to agents and editors but will that make you an auto-buy with readers?
And Connie Brockway are full of the romance of love and when they do go to bed you don't feel like skimming the pages.
Q - so lovely to see you again. And you hit it right on the head - Talent. It takes talent to write those books that become our favorites.
Jo Beverley has it in spades.
Maggie - I absolutely adore dialog - good dialog. It's what turns the pages for me. I'd say Jennifer Crusie has a gift for marrying all the elements that make a romance novel great in her books -I'd say from the very first book she wrote. Believable characters, great romance, great dialog and great sex.
So, as up and coming authors, how do we face this writing challenge?
How did the newly published accomplish this? And have they?
This is a part of writing I stress about and a part of reading I have to have. I get tired of H/H meeting and then *BOOM* they're in love. They call it falling for a reason. You have to make them fall into it, not just step in it. LOL!
Christie Craig does a nice job of this. Her heroines are determined not to fall in love or they are determined not to fall in love with the kind of guy they think the hero is. But Christie shows them falling through little actions or bits of dialog from the hero. He's good with kids or is gentle with a pet. Or he just says the right thing at the right time. And that's not always something romantic.
This is what I want to do. I'll admit my H/H kiss pretty quick in the story, but the sex does not happen by chapter 3. And I'd say in most of the really good books, the sex happens when it's right for the story. That may be 300 pages in or 80 pages in, but it's usually, for me, better when it comes later and I have more invested in the characters.
I miss the romance too. Too many books that remind me of that line from "Speed", where Keanu Reeves tells Sandra Bullock (then she tells it back to him later) that romances that come out of dramatic and tense situations never last. (And romantically he says, "We'll just have to base it on sex then." Funny enough, in the next movie, *he's* not there. See where a relationship of sex gets you? Alone on a cruise ship, in a *baaaaaaad* movie. Learn from Sandra, kids.)
I sometimes wonder as I'm reading romantic thrillers or fantasy whirlwhind romances, does this couple have what it takes to keep it going forever? Do they truly love each other enough that when all this dies off, they'll still want to be together? (Incidentally I like reading romances where this issue is addressed.)
I agree with Santa--hopping into bed on page 30 does not equate sexual tension or romance. Sure, if it's part of the plot, but it almost feels like cheating to me. The story is not about the sex. The story is about two people falling in love--so show that.
I have been reading less and less romances lately, I admit. And I tend to stick with my tried and true authors--though even occasionally they let me down.
*LOL* I think Terri makes a point. The sex is better when you're more invested in the characters--you know, like how sex is better with a person when you know them longer than one-night or even more than the three requisite dates. Sleeping with a guy for more than his hot body is infinitely more satisfying. For me, sex is mostly a mental game--as is reading--and I can't get into as much if it's done on page 3 rather than page 200. Doing it on page three has the mental equivalent of foreplay of saying, "Brace yourself, Effie!"
I love Hellie's idea. We need more mental foreplay in the story before you just drop us into bed. LOL!
I think the key to making this happen is probably knowing your characters really well. I need to know what aspects of a man's character would make my heroine fall in love. And vice versa. Major obstacle for me as I can't even figure out what I would want, nevermind these imaginary people. LOL!
Is it safe to say this part of the story needs to be unique to the characters?
THAT'S what I miss. The sexual tension. This part of a story does it for me, more so than all the rest. Julia Quinn recently hit this with Mr. Cavendish, I Presume. Here were two people promised to one another but never realizing until his world is thrown awray that they were MADE for one another. A truly sigh worthy story. EJ also hit this in The Return of the Duke. Great 'AHA' moments in both.
I'll also raise the flag here for those traditional Regencies that, again, when well written had you on the edge of your seat and not in anticipation of the hero and heroine besting the villain.
Hellion - I've often wondered the same thing that once the action has stopped - does all the action die off. And I'm with you on the need for more mental foreplay, please.
Terrio - Crafting a story where the sex takes place when it's supposed to vs. that it's supposed to happen is the challenge we all face. If I don't feel it's right as I'm writing it (and only for the sake of getting published) how can I expect my readers to continue to read or buy more of my books, for that matter.
I wonder if it's because I read - almost exclusively - Regency Romance that I almost never come across a bedroom scene in the first 30 pages. I can think of one historical I've read where there was intimacy in the beginning. Sometimes, they don't happen until we're almost at the end of the book. For this reason, I do not feel that romance is missing from romance novels at all.
As for the H/H meeting in the first 3 chapters - I tend to like that when I'm reading. Not to say I would mind if they didn't, as long as it was right for the story. My 2nd ms has the H/H meeting in chapter 4, and it's totally necessary...in my opinion :)
Great discussion, Santa!
Sorry, that should be Jerrica. It would help if I could type. LOL!
And therein lies the catch 22. LOL! In the original version of my WIP, the H/H met in chapter 3. They meet right away now and it does work better, but writing it the original way told me tons of info I needed to know.
Jerrico - Historicals do usually take a little longer but I can think of ones where the intimacy happens pretty quickly. Even if it's not the H/H jumping into bed, I also think some authors have the Historical characters in passionate embraces really early. Balogh's Simply Unforgettable had sex pretty early (which was the impetus for the rest of the plot) and even Cathy Maxwell has her H/H in a passionate embrace within minutes of meeting each other in Seduction at Christmas.
*waving at Jerrica* Hi! Good to see you here!
*waving back at Marnee* Great to see you here too! :)
Terrio, I must be reading the wrong (or right!) thing. I can only think of one Regency I've read where the H/H were intimate in the first chapter...and I have to admit, I've not picked up another book from that author. I didn't like it at all. Thankfully, my favorite authors keep pumping out what I -do- love!
It is a fine line to walk: meeting as soon as possible vs meeting when it seems most feasible. It's that Opening Hook quandry we all feel. Almost like we need to start the story AFTER the action started, so we feel like we're catching up.
I love watching movies and dissecting the Ordinary World/Pre-Incident moments--and within ten, fifteen minutes at the longest, we have The Inciting Incident--the HOOK; and you don't feel you've wasted all your time watching the Ordinary World.
Sometimes, this is done in reverse. Think of Bridget Jones' Diary. The INCIDENT is her mom's curry buffet dinner--and she overhears Mark Darcy saying that horribly rude comment about her. I mean, she even tells us THAT was the incident that propelled her towards this new life. The moments that follow that incident show us Bridget's normal life: her in her pjs at her flat, drinking wine, and being ungloriously single.
I think the key is making sure the reader identifies the parts that are the Ordinary World about the character so we can become more emotionally invested in them.
I think historicals, the social mores that are necessary in historical settings, are prime for writing good sexual tension. I think that's one of the reasons I like historicals. The social rules are their own conflict. :)
Jerrica - It does sound like you are reading the *right* books. LOL! I do think the authors that have been around longer are the ones who can get away with taking the story in a natural progression instead of the wham bam thing drilled into new authors.
Marn - You're very right. Then again, it's when authors decide to ignore those societal limitations instead of writing a good story around them that drives me a little batty. :)
This is going to be a weird example, but the movie Monsters vs. Aliens is an example of what Hellie is saying. The ordinary world of the heroine is almost non-existent and the inciting incident happens so fast that you feel like you missed something. Then you have less investment in how the heroine changes over the story because you never really saw her or new her in her ordinary world. That movie could have been so much better if they had invested as much into the actual story and character arcs as they did the special effects.
I agree with Marn. I think the key is tension, may it be sexual or not. The idea is to hook the reader into reading the rest of the book. As I've said before I'm a romance reader that tends to skip sex scenes more often than not. It's not exactly the sex that hooks me into the story, it's the strength of the voice and characters that is bringing me into the story.
I know I'm about to admit to probably the cardinal sin of romance writers (although I'd have to say I think what you're talking about here is the real cardinal sin):
I don't write sex scenes. (And I don't read them unless it's for a crit partner.) Ever. So if I ever get published, you'll never have this problem ;) .
I think that having the characters fall into bed too soon is a great way to ruin the sexual tension. I mean, how many of us read to the chapter 3 sex scene and wonder why they're in bed already (a lot, apparently). And then after that, it's like, "Oh, they're going to sleep together again. Great." Not how will they get past this, not if/when it'll ever happen, but will it happen again? Does anyone really care at that point?
On the other hand, if it's really a romance, I think it's important to have the h/h meet ASAP. It's one thing to have some really important events in the plot that have to happen first. But delaying the initial meeting for the sake of delaying (or delaying it at all, maybe) doesn't build sexual tension.
You have to have some pretty interesting stuff happening for the first 15 chapters if your readers came in expecting a romance and don't have a hero and heroine in the same state until then.
OMG, Santa, I was just talking about this yesterday with Karen Hawkins. Y'all know I can do without sex scenes. Don't need them, usually skim them. IMO, Karen, Eloisa James, Julia Quinn and most of my fav authors write about the falling in love. Its not about lusting or jumping in the sack. Its about getting to know each other. Describing the first time you touched each others hand. The first time you worried about their well being. How good it made you feel to make them laugh. Those are all the good parts for me!
Excellent blog, San!
Kim--Once I had a CP tell me "all this happy-meeting-a-new-boyfriend-stuff isn't very interesting."
Maybe romance wasn't the right genre for her...
Not that I don't like to write sex.
I think that's the best part about romance is the falling in love with someone part.
Marn--The social mores issue—I love the challenge of working within the parameters set by society or culture and playing against them. Not bothering to acknowledge or even research them, esp in a historical, drives me batty!
Jordan - Ever? LOL! Wow. And I think there's a difference between the H/H meeting in the 3rd paragraph and the 3rd chapter. LOL! That's what I was talking about. The only author I can think of that pulled off that chapter 15 thing was Lisa Kleypas in Sugar Daddy. Which is probably why lots of people qualify that one as more Women's Fiction. But that story would not have been the same if we didn't get to read about Liberty's developing years. And think of how much Hardy we'd have missed out on! *sigh*
Kim - You hit it exactly for me. I'd rather read about the thrill the hero gets out of making the heroine smile than most anything. That's the sweet stuff that is the falling in love. Not that I mind the falling into bed, but sharing something real *outside* the bedroom makes all the difference.
Jordan - I wasn't thinking you were a prude. LOL! I was thinking she's lucky she never has to write sex and then she must be REALLY good at writing everything else. :)
Not exactly the same as that one. In Sugar Daddy, the heroine has a meager upbringing, loses her mother as a teen and has to raise her younger sister. She grows up in a trailer park where she falls in love with a neighbor boy who leaves her to make his way in the world. She makes her own way, meets a wealthy older man and somewhere around the middle of the book meets his eldest son. The rest is the story of their romance and it's an amazing story. Very much a Romance but also unorthodox for what we're used to today.
I have to agree it's all about the tension, not the sex. I recently had to crit a story for school (it was eroitca, so expected) where the h/h met in a bar on page 1, were in bed by page 3, and we were on to the orgasm by page 10. It was well-written, accurate, and should have been hot. But I felt like a voyer - it was two people I didn't know, didn't care about in the slightest yet, having sex. I don't want to watch two strangers have sex! lol We didn't even find out the hero's name until after they were into the act!
I usually prefer waiting at least until the half way point for sex, if not later. I like all the falling-in-love stuff before hand. Although, in my current MS, the h/h have sex on page 60. But in my defense, it wasn't really written to be hot sex, but more emotionally devastating to the heroine (kind of a backwards inciting incident) and I think it will actually ramp up tension later.
I read a Julia Quinn last weekend (The Viscount who Loved Me) and the scene that stands out the most wasn't the kisses or sex - it was when the hero crawled under a table to comfort the heroine. *sigh*
Great blog, Santa! I think you've all hit the nail on the head... it's the falling we like to see - which is a process not one specific act (like having sex).
I think I'll have to check out Christie Craig, Terri. That's the kind of story I like to read - when the H/H think the other is the exact opposite of what they want or need and then find out they were sooo wrong. I'm reading a lot of Marianne Stillings now and the H/H slowly learning about each other through dialogue and the situations they've been put in is fun to watch. Especially the dialogue. I love witty reparte and smarta$$ heroes.
I think the stuff *outside* the bedroom is what makes the stuff inside the bedroom that much more explosive and satisfying.
Oh, and great blog Santa!
Terr—LOL, just clarifying. It's not laziness; it's principles. I don't dare to make judgment calls on my own work ;) .
Irish - If you like Marianne then you'll love Christie's books. The characters have issues and fears that are real and the sex is there, but not the focus. These people fall into lust pretty quick but then gradually fall into love and it's a wonderful ride.
Hal - Though I know Erotica is a subgenre of Romance and there are those with romance as an integral part, I think readers of Erotica are more interested in the tittulation and that's why it serves its purpose so well. With the demand for more sex in those books, I'd say the authors have even more of a challenge to get the romance in. A talent all its own. When you get a good one, it can be really fun.
As a side note, Jordan writes very good sexual tension, just without the sex. :) She is gifted, I tell ya.
And I appreciate that she reads my sex scenes anyway. She's really a saint. ("all my life" - wink wink, Jordee). :)
Jordan - You and I both know no one could call you lazy. LOL!
Santa, brilliant! I've been caught up on this thought lately. Plus, a somewhat recent read of a favorite author left me feeling like there was no build. It was just *wham* they were instantly in love and I couldn't get over it.
I'm right there with ya Marnee Jo and Sin! The sexual tension is absolutely key for me. When they have sex right away I'm like, WTF?! Now what are you working toward?! Ok, ok, yes, I know they're working toward love but still...
And Hellion, it's so funny that you mention Speed because that was the very first thing that came to mind as I was reading the post!
I'm reading a novel by Stephanie Laurens and it's really interesting bc while the hero is falling for the heroine as one person, he's not falling for her so quickly in her real role. If that makes sense? But anyway, it's interesting because it allows SL to work in all the sexual stuff that they say to stick in on chapter 3 but yet the actual romance is drawn out in (what is to me) a more realistic way.
What's this about sex by chapter 3? I don't think I've ever read a romance where they have sex that early (except erotica and some blaze category books), but I'd have to agree. If you have sex that early, there's no tension left for the rest of the book!
Aw, Marn, I'm blushing (and not just because you mentioned my name and sex in the same sentence!). I learned from a master (that would be you, Marn).
LOL.
Hal - I think sex by the 3rd chapter is a general phrase we're using for sex too soon. Then again, if written right, sex can certainly complicate all kinds of matters and cause more conflict than it cures. LOL!
Steph - You totally lost me there. LOL! But it does sound like the author has found a way to create the best of both worlds.
Jordan - I think you're smart for sticking to your guns. I've heard of writers uncomfortable with the sex scenes trying to write them because they think they have to, and my guess is the lack of comfort comes through to the reader. It's been clearly proven you can write a wonderful romance without any sex at all!
Ter—Thanks :D . I've heard some people say that you should force yourself outside your comfort zone as a writer, but I think you're right in saying that awkwardness in the process of writing can come across in the finished product.
oh yeah - you can always tell when authors go past where they're comfortable when it comes to writing sex. Stick to what you want to write - the story will be better in the end for it.
Jordan - This is why you'll never find me writing about shapeshifters and the like. I couldn't pull it off in a million years. LOL! Not believably anyway. Writing is work, but it's also something we do because we like it. Love it even. If I'm going to write something, it's going to be what I want, not what someone thinks I should write.
*applause*
*off balance curtsey*
Thank you.
*picks up her soapbox and toddles off, taking her hooha with her*
I think a lot of this discussion falls into the struggle with genre. Romance? Erotic Romance? Erotica? And what is considered the 'norm' for any person.
Like my discussion with Judi McCoy regarding a threesome automatically makes it erotica. I write sex as a pivotal part of the story. And it isn't always about romance or falling in love. Miranda is a sexual witch. She enjoys sex and she needs it to assist her magical abilities. Falling love happens afterward.
But as a plot it's difficult to get it across to a reader without it automatically being seen as erotica.
Blast, having electrial problems...get back to this later! Better hit send while I can!
And hope your electrical problems clear up!
Chance - Your issue might be a bit different than this stuff. We're not saying you can't have sex from start to finish, but how to do we *show* the couple actually falling in love and not just into bed. It's about the little details that happen between the sex scenes. We're running into the danger of those details being lost in the effort to create sexier stories.
And I love when Terri busts out the soapbox. :)
Awh, shucks, Jordan. You're sweet. :)
True, and there is a real issue about good writing not needing the ol' wall banging. Books got along without it for a long, long time!
But what one person considers unnecessary sex, another person views as terribly necessary. It's a balancing game between the author and reader. And the editors get in the way, believing that the titillators will sell better... I guess because it's more controversial and that stirs interest?
It drives me crazy and I know there are editors out there who must find it crazy, too. They want to sell a good story, but the marketing people, the money-men, are saying... "SEX SELLS! GIVE US MORE SEX!!!"
BTW, Last Chance, me sis, is pleased to find she isn't the only one out there who skims the sex scenes... She wants a good story, and could really care less about the sex stuff. (That doesn't sound right...but I think it works! Love ya, sis!)
First rain after the new pole was installed...sure it's leaking into connections and giving the lines hysterics. It will calm down.
Meanwhile...there is Starbucks!
Marnee - Yeah! And the deck looks so nice after all those soap bubbles 'r washed away!
I'm starting to feel a bit conspicuous because I read all love scenes. LOL!
I don't care how much sex a book has (though I prefer it HAVE it) as long as the author doesn't sacrifice the romance to get it in there. (pun intended *g*)
I really like ta read sex... but find meself skimmin' when I feel it gets in the way a' movin' the plot along. I wants ta know what happens wit' the pivotal stuff.
Me problem is sex is a pivotal part a' many a' me books...but not as an erotic tool. (Ta be honest, I don't feel I write it good enough ta be called erotica...wit' a few exceptions.)
Ta me, sex is a powerful energy source. Be it magical or medical. Aye, I be writin' fantasy!
Someday, I meet the person who can 'elp me understand the difference when it comes ta the writin' and genre struggles...
Santa - BTW, thanks fer agreein' wit' me 'bout Connie Brockway. I only read one a' 'ers, but she had a turn a phrase that just lit me up. Nothin' ta do wit' sex...but just beautiful. I'll see if I can find it ta post...
Here it be... "Inside, the electricity had been shut off, but the same moonlight that illuminated the outdoors had seeped in here, too."
I just love the picture that paints...sigh.
I read romances because they are relationship books. I'm interested in how the H/H relate to one another and how the other pieces of their lives fit into the relationship. Sex, explicitly or implicitly, is part of their relationship. I have favorite writers all along the mainstream romance sensuality continuum who write books I love, but they all keep the focus on the relationships.
I think Julie James has shown that contemporaries can be smart and sexy and truly contemporary and yet not have the H/H falling into bed ten minutes after they meet. Irish, I second Terri's rec of Christie Craig. She had me laughing on page one.
As for historicals, Vanessa Kelly's Mastering the Marquess is a new release that does a wonderful job of building the H/H relationship. I highly recommend it too.
Janga - I have Julie's book on my TBR and I'm hoping to get to it soon. I'd heard it was sexy but didn't hear the smart part. Now I'll have to get to it sooner.
Yes, Christie is great... When you get to the sex, if feels right and you're ready for it. And you get to laugh a lot on the way.
GREAT discussion here ladies. Forgive me for being tardy in responding so late. I just got back from my baby girl's birthday party. Twelve year old squeals are still echoing in my ear. They tipped their waiter at lunch 'cause he was cute. *rolls eyes* Lord, save me!
I have to say a quick hello to Jerrica. She's my chapter mate! Hi Jerrica.
It is refreshing to hear that so many up and coming authors, such as ourselves, are trying work the sexual tension and sheer joy of the mating dance, if you will, into our stories. And yes, all the great authors mentioned are and have been doing just that!
And Julie James is an author I've been waiting to read. Sexy and smart works for me every time. That's why I wanted to read Karen Hawkins' first foray into contemporary writing. She does it right whether in historical or contemporary format. I, for one, think it's a difficult transition from one sub-genre to another without sounding like you've just left a ball.
Keep chatting. I'll be back after violin lessons...for my daughter not me, lol.
I been scolded by me sis...she does care about sex.
Post a Comment