Fascinating discussion.
My expectations, like Laura Vivanco’s, are generally higher for contemporary characters. I expect them, particularly the heroines, to act in a way that makes sense and is relatable. At least in paranormals/historicals, I can chalk that kind of thing up to an aspect of world-building and it works well for me.

That, right there, is a large part of what I was trying to say in my first post. I enjoy the extra focus on the relationship possible in a good contemporary, but most of the ones I’ve tried aren’t focused enough to make it work without making a character inconsistent, or relying on stupid conflict. Thus, paranormal or suspense conflict are something I’m more likely to read, because it’s less likely to be glaringly annoying.

I have this in my TBR pile. Ditto on the snowbound theme. I think Larissa Ione has a book by the same title that I’ve been lusting after.

there is an Ione with the same title, and some older books, too.

dharmagirl wrote:

I wonder if some of the other genres, i.e. paranormal, however, ask more questions about that narrative path? Do they call the genre conventions and/or relationship tensions into question more?

In some ways, i think paranormals do LESS of this, but I would not want to generalize. I will be interested in what you make of this subgenre!

Shannon C. wrote:

Fiona, who thought like someone twice her age.

I never thought of it that way, but you are right.

I agree. The PTSD thing was wonderful. When you started quoting that passage about the flashback, I remembered it exactly and got a little chill.

Fiona was kind of a mess for me, and I think the reason I didn’t like her is mostly the reason I’m not a big contemporary fan. My expectations, like Laura Vivanco’s, are generally higher for contemporary characters. I expect them, particularly the heroines, to act in a way that makes sense and is relatable. So often they don’t, and we end up with characters like Fiona, who thought like someone twice her age. At least in paranormals/historicals, I can chalk that kind of thing up to an aspect of world-building and it works well for me.

I’ve been trying to avoid spoilers, and I still don’t want to give any, so I can’t be specific about it, but the circumstances which led to this hero having PTSD are ones which made me draw parallels. I read another romance from the same line, also featuring an Iraq veteran, whose guilt was due to the fact that he wondered if he could have done something to save some comrades, and I didn’t get the same vibes from it, so I do think it was something about the specifics of this book which made me feel the way I did.

Ah, I see. Thanks for explaining.

Unfortunately the issues you mentioned with Fiona brought my grade down quite a bit. When I first reviewed this book I couldn’t put my finger on what it was that didn’t work for me, but you summed it up quite well here.

Although I liked Fiona in the beginning as the novel progressed I found myself becoming more and more annoyed with her. I appreciate that she was frustrated with John’s refusal to deal with his issues, but her reactions seemed off to me.

On the contemporary front: I agree with you completely. There really isn’t anything I can add, so I’ll just say…

Word.

I’ve been trying to avoid spoilers, and I still don’t want to give any, so I can’t be specific about it, but the circumstances which led to this hero having PTSD are ones which made me draw parallels. I read another romance from the same line, also featuring an Iraq veteran, whose guilt was due to the fact that he wondered if he could have done something to save some comrades, and I didn’t get the same vibes from it, so I do think it was something about the specifics of this book which made me feel the way I did.

I think I agree. And I think that is also some of the appeal of cateogries, it’s just *that* stripped back to the bare essentials.