I just this morning wrote out an outline that fits all three and one quarter of category romances I have so far read. The conformity is quite amazing! It goes a lot further than just what you detailed, even. I have yet to see how well page percentages go with the plot points.
Basically, it goes like this: A and B meet and are instantly attracted to each other. At least one of them has a trauma that s/he hasn't quite got over. There is a misunderstanding between them. They are forced to spend a lot of time with each other because of a contract. The attraction begins to seem "deeper than usual" -> first kiss/midpoint. The emotion continues to deepen as they hit some tender points related to the trauma. Then disaster - the misunderstanding deepens or a pre-midpoint ruse is uncovered that throws the man in a poor light. The man must now heroically prove himself and also deal with the trauma, either his or hers; in a way that leaves him emotionally vulnerable/in the woman's power. The woman realizes she has misjudged him and forgives him completely. They get married, or if they were already married (see contract), they have a child.
Every. Single. One.
Okay, well, the suspense one dealt with the final male faux pas a little differently, I admit, but the others fit the above plot perfectly.
I do think Harlequin publishes a lot of trash (who else would have thought Linda Goodnight was worthy of publication?), that's also why I want to try submitting something to them. Lowers the bar, so to speak! I'm not a bad writer, I think, but I'm not ambitious and I do tend to get too emotional, so I thought it'd be perfect.
It still seems to me that if a romance novel is good, it'll no longer be called a romance novel, in the same way that a romantic comedy that is both good and funny (and not British) gets called "a warm-hearted drama". The genre definition has begun to mean "meaningless unfunny bubblegum fluff". See the official reviews linked to on IMDB's As Good As It Gets page - the only reviewer calling it a romantic comedy was the one that didn't like it! Jane Austen and George Eliot (at least her Middlemarch, which is the only one I've read), the Brontë sisters, all wrote romances, but those novels get to shelter under the term of "classic". The Great Gatsby too. I can't really think of a 21st century alternative at this very moment, but I'm sure they're out there - fantastic romantic novels that don't get called that because they're actually good! So a romance novel that is good can never rescue the genre because it is taken out of the genre in the minds of the populace and by the tricks of the publishers, by virtue of being good. That's my theory, anyhow.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-08-17 06:39 am (UTC)Basically, it goes like this: A and B meet and are instantly attracted to each other. At least one of them has a trauma that s/he hasn't quite got over. There is a misunderstanding between them. They are forced to spend a lot of time with each other because of a contract. The attraction begins to seem "deeper than usual" -> first kiss/midpoint. The emotion continues to deepen as they hit some tender points related to the trauma. Then disaster - the misunderstanding deepens or a pre-midpoint ruse is uncovered that throws the man in a poor light. The man must now heroically prove himself and also deal with the trauma, either his or hers; in a way that leaves him emotionally vulnerable/in the woman's power. The woman realizes she has misjudged him and forgives him completely. They get married, or if they were already married (see contract), they have a child.
Every. Single. One.
Okay, well, the suspense one dealt with the final male faux pas a little differently, I admit, but the others fit the above plot perfectly.
I do think Harlequin publishes a lot of trash (who else would have thought Linda Goodnight was worthy of publication?), that's also why I want to try submitting something to them. Lowers the bar, so to speak! I'm not a bad writer, I think, but I'm not ambitious and I do tend to get too emotional, so I thought it'd be perfect.
It still seems to me that if a romance novel is good, it'll no longer be called a romance novel, in the same way that a romantic comedy that is both good and funny (and not British) gets called "a warm-hearted drama". The genre definition has begun to mean "meaningless unfunny bubblegum fluff". See the official reviews linked to on IMDB's As Good As It Gets page - the only reviewer calling it a romantic comedy was the one that didn't like it! Jane Austen and George Eliot (at least her Middlemarch, which is the only one I've read), the Brontë sisters, all wrote romances, but those novels get to shelter under the term of "classic". The Great Gatsby too. I can't really think of a 21st century alternative at this very moment, but I'm sure they're out there - fantastic romantic novels that don't get called that because they're actually good! So a romance novel that is good can never rescue the genre because it is taken out of the genre in the minds of the populace and by the tricks of the publishers, by virtue of being good. That's my theory, anyhow.