AAR

[MarianneM]

I've been thinking about this since last night. when I threw this book into the wastebasket, and then felt a vast sense of relief. I know that it received a B+ from the AAR reviewer, and I read the review. But unfortunately, I could only barely get through the prologue chapter before I had to hurl it from me -- before I hurled. This is a romance novel? No, no, this is a sadist's delight. Since when does a book this violent, this revolting fall into the definition of 'romantic suspense?' Of course, I didn't read it all the way through. I'm on a short clock here, my friends. I'm 81, and I'm careful what I contaminate my thoughts with.

Let's get back to definitions, shall we? Definitions are the foundation of reasonable discussion, and some of you may wonder how I reached the above conclusion. I'm a lifelong mystery story reader -- and as I noted above, that's a long life. I had always thought that mystery stories could do with some romantic influences, and always enjoyed those which had them. When the sub-category 'romantic suspense' was added to the romance genre, I was pleased. And I've been pleased with most of the resulting books written to fill this category, like those written by Krentz, Howard, Lisa Kleypas and Jenny Crusie. But I'm angry when a writer inserts ugly, graphically described murder and other violence into what the publisher issues as a romantic suspense novel. That's not romance, folks. That's sadism. And while the two opposites may collide in real life, if rarely, I don't like being suckered into spending my good money for one thing, and finding it's another.

It troubles me even more that apparently some publishers and some readers can't tell the difference between sensationalist horror and romance.

I can. I've lived through my share of both, including the Second World War, Holocaust and its aftermath, the Neurenburg Trials. They left deep scars on me. So when I tried to plan my sunset years, I deliberately chose the romance genre as a way of 'going gentle into that good night,' as cheerfully as possible.

I think that books like this one should be tagged with a skull and crossbones as a warning to folks like me [and I'm not the only one out here].

MarianneM

[Katie Mack AAR]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. I believe that within the Romantic Suspense subgenre, stories can range from lighthearted to dark and edgy, with a whole variation in between. I agree with RWA's definition of Romantic Suspense: "Romance novels in which suspense, mystery, or thriller elements constitute an integral part of the plot." (emphasis mine)

Fade to Black definitely falls into the dark and edgy category. Do some readers avoid stories about psychotic serial killers? Yes. Do all? No. In fact some readers really like dark and edgy romantic suspense, and some romance writers really like writing them. I think that to require that all romance writers and readers conform to some readers' preference for light romantic suspense is a disservice to all. Everyone has their own tastes, and more often than not we don't all agree. That's the beauty of having freedom of choice where our reading material is concerned.

[Em]

I very much agree with your reaction to some of the latest purveyors of "romantic suspense" out there, Marianne M. I wouldn't dream of censoring anyone else's appreciation for these authors and books, but like you I have been completely turned off by the very graphic violence in some of them. I have tried to read some of the books reviewed here on AAR--Lisa Gardner's latest, for example--and just gave up in distaste. It's not that the writing is bad, it's just that I too would rather read something else, rather than ever more detailed descriptions of brutality, especially against women and children.

I dunno, these books seem more like "police procedurals", rather than romantic suspense. To me, it was writers like Helen McInnes, Anne Armstrong and Mary Stewart who represented the genre. Nowadays it seems that what passes for romantic suspense is more like an episode of CSI, with a competition to see who can come up with the most outre villain and killings. No thanks, I'll pass on these offerings too.

[Margaret]

[Rebekah]

I personally did not mind Fade to Black. I love Karen Rose and this was not as graphic as her works. I disagree, I feel it is a romance, as romance is loosely defined, there is a couple, that couple is part of the main story arc, and the story ends in a HEA (if not with a marriage proposal).

In romantic suspense and romance/horror novels I've found that the horrific parts are easily skipped over. The author never really puts any pertinent details in, those details hardly ever add to suspends because, frankly, most romance authors write AWFUL villains. Not awful as in evil, but awful as in two dimensional and apropos of Law and Order reruns. If they turn your stomach...skip-em. There's often still a good romance story in there somewhere.

Authors I would give this advice about:
Karen Rose
Nora Roberts
JD Robb
Linda Howard
Leslie Parrish
JR Ward


Nalini Singh, though, I feel, does a decent job of writing her psy villains.

[MarianneM]

Ms. Mack ... I don't want to continue to beat this drum, but I can't ignore what you have said on the subject. Yes, romantic suspense novels include some aspects of thrillers. But the good ones, like Linda Howard's Up Close and Dangerous and Cry No More, and Elizabeth Lowell's The Wrong Hostage, don't have gratuitous and ugly descriptions of bloody violence. 'dick,' a former English professor, this website's longterm poster and master of knowledge and good sense, initiated a thread several years ago in which he outlined the rather extensive elements which define a romance novel and differentiate it from other fiction. First and foremost, it must have an HEA. Then it must have as its main plot feature the growth of a relationship between two main characters who fall in love with each other and gain that happy ending. Raw violence against characters within the book are not for the most part present and never described in brutal detail. Other aspects and details of the plot are flexible, and wonderful things have been done over the years to keep the formula alive and the stories fresh. But I contend that "edginess and dark violence" meaning ugly bloody details of torture, have no place in romantic suspense.

It's like trying to breed a chihuahua with a Great Dane. Theoretically, it may be possible. But the results would be ridiculous.

MarianneM

[MarianneM]

I was startled and very pleased to see someone agree with me on this book, because in the ten years I have been reading this website, it seems to me that the lines have become more and more blurred on what is acceptable and what is not. If one reads for pleasure, as you and I do, one has a right to expect certain things from the books one buys that are designated as romance novels. To my mind, the author and the publisher make certain unspoken promises to the reader who buys their book. Included in those promises is an agreement not to cause the reader to like a character and then to kill him or her off, whether in a bloody awful way or not.

Back in the 1950s I read a murder mystery called A Kiss Before Dying, by Ira Levin. It was highly praised at the time, but I hated it, because the author caused me, the reader, to really like the protagonist. And then he killed him off in a particularly bloody way. I felt that Levin had broken the 'unspoken compact' between reader and author, and I never read another book by him.

Authors who write romance novels make certain unspoken promises to the reader ... that their book will have a believable happy ending; that the hero/heroine will have a growing, happy relationship and that the reader will be able to see it grow and follow it to its HEA. We don't read these books to suffer, you know. We have enough of that in our daily lives. We read them to escape into a better, sweeter, more just world than the one we live in. And when the book I paid my hard-earned money for doesn't deliver that, I feel cheated.

MarianneM

[Katie Mack AAR]

[Leigh]

It has gotten to the point, that I rarely read romantic suspense, which used to be my favorite genre. I not much into sex scenes so I love stories that have what seems like more of a plot. Maybe it is because I cut my teeth on Mary Stewart.

Now I find it very difficult to find books that are not too violent or all about the sex between the couples.

I have picked up numerous books given high ratings here, and as soon as I find that I am in a serial killer's mind, I just put it back down.

I have wondered at the more liberal interpretation of romance, but honestly I know plenty of people that love these type of books. On another bookboard that I post, I am in the minority, with most people loving today's romantic suspense.

I can understand that authors (like Nora Roberts, Tami Hoag, Iris Johansen, Mariah Stewart )did it to attract new readers. I doubt that Nora would be as big as she is today if she just wrote straight romance. And it is not that I didn't read these authors when they made the switch. But about nine years ago, I realize that I couldn't read another book with a serial killer in it. It was like everyone was doing it. I wondered at the time if publishers or agents were telling everyone "you want a best selling book, put a serial killer in it" And maybe the numbers showed and or show that. .

I know that it is personal preference, and I understand that. . but it just disturbs me to think that there are actual people out there like this. . .
Personally, I just find them depressing, because I know that somewhere out there, while I am reading the book, violence is happening against a woman or child. .

[janet w]

You know the Brockmann, Into the Storm? I still haven't read a single scene with that ghastly psycho bad guy. I just bought One Scream Away by Kate Brady -- we'll see. If I have to skip too many scenes, I just won't read that author again. With Robb and a few scarier Roberts, I just skip over scenes that are too much. Torture, children being harmed: I can't deal with that.

Linda Howard did an amazing job of walking the line in Cry No More.

Why not a violence rating on AAR? We get Burning, Hot etc. etc. ... it wouldn't bother me and might even help me decide if a book was one I would enjoy.

[jebe]

[Leigh]

[Sunita]

For many years I read both romance novels and mystery novels, and I kept the two elements separate (with some exceptions, e.g., Dorothy Sayers, Georgette Heyer's mysteries). I did that because I usually found the hybrids were less satisfying.

In the past year I've read books by Karen Rose and Roxanne St. Claire and enjoyed them very much. Karen Rose in particular writes extremely graphic violence, but her hero and heroine go through a genuine and satisfying romantic journey, and I believe in their HEAs. I have several more of her books in my TBR and I'm looking forward to reading them, although they take a particular frame of mind for me to enjoy!

Ordinarily I wouldn't touch a serial killer, graphic-violence book. But I find that some authors pull off the combination. Obviously not everyone agrees. Maybe a violence rating for RS would be a good idea.

I agree that the old suspense writers (Helen MacInnes, Mary Stewart) were much less graphic. But the mainstream mystery and detective novels of the time were as well. So to compare today's RS with previous decades is not the right comparison, IMHO. Instead, the comparison should be between RS and non-Romantic Suspense in the same time periods. If we use that standard, today's RS is more understandable. Satisfying to all readers is a different matter. But, then, I imagine there were people who didn't like MacInnes and Stewart back in the day.

[Leigh]

[Cora]

I haven't read Fade to Black, so I cannot comment on that novel.

And I accept that readers have certain hot button issues, I have a couple myself. However, personal hot buttons are just that, personal. Just because a romance novel hits my or anybody else's personal hot buttons does not mean that it's not a romance, it only means that it's not a romance for me.

I personally don't mind graphic violence, though I don't crave it either. And I fully agree that there are too many serial killer plots in romantic suspense and that many of them are not handled very well. But since graphic serial killer romantic suspense continues to be published, there must be a readership for it. And if a romantic suspense novel features a couple finding its happy ending, then it is a romance, even if the serial killer du jour graphically dismembers small children on the page. I do not necessarily want to read it, but it is a romance.

Moreover, based the review of Fade to Black one could guess that it is a more graphic novel, after all it features a serial killer sending videos of his deeds. Hence anyone who does not wish to read graphic violence could avoid the book.

That said, a violence rating for AAR reviews would be a good idea, since it help those that do not wish to read graphic violence avoid those books.