Which one of these things is not like the other?
- Mystery
- Science Fiction
- Fantasy
- Historical
- Thriller
- Bodice-ripping romance
Why does “romance” always get an adjective (usually “bodice-ripper”) from the mainstream press when other genres don’t? Is there some other kind of romance that I don’t know about?
Edited to add: I am not trying to rehash old debates (asking why romances get no respect, etc.). I am just making note of three things about the term that interest me:
1. Romance novels are always referred to using the same (derogatory) adjective. I wonder, if the dismissive view of romance is as uniform as it appears to be, why is it necessary to use any adjective at all. Why not just say, for example, “Allende has not written literature, she has merely written a romance.”, where everyone understands romance to mean “crap”? What would “romance”, simpliciter, be to these critics?
2. The adjective “bodice-ripper” is used much more widely than I thought, not just to refer to melodramatically sexy elements of non-romance fiction, but to non-fiction, and even to non-books, i.e. things like dance, art exhibits, and political imbroglios. I am merely pointing that out.
3. Point number 1 makes me think it’s possibly a good thing we still have an adjective, albeit a demeaning one, since it opens a space for folks like to Mary Bly (Eloisa James) [link at end] to distance themselves from “bodice rippers” while embracing the label “romance writer.”
