Friday, September 9, 2016


In an earlier review post about Love Between the Covers, a documentary about the romance writing community, I don't believe I mentioned that I had been interviewed for the film, although my interview did not end up being featured :-(. But to celebrate the nationwide release of the film, director Laurie Kahn has released a bunch of clips from interviews that were not included in the final cut—including two by yours truly.

The first is a very general discussion of how heroes in heterosexual romance have changed from the 1970's to the present:

LBTC Bonus Clip - Jackie Horne - The construction of masculinity from Laurie Kahn on Vimeo.

The second talks about the pleasures and potential problems in hetersexual women reading male/male romance:

LBTC Bonus Clip - Jackie Horne - Male/male romance written by women from Laurie Kahn on Vimeo.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on either!

And, case you haven't seen it yet, here's a trailer for the film:

Love Between the Covers - Official Trailer from Laurie Kahn on Vimeo.

Love Between the Covers may not have been featured at your local cinema, but that is no longer an impediment to your viewing pleasure. Because the documentary is now available for rental and/or purchase, at Amazon and iTunes. And it's also available on a lot of other platforms, too (Google Play, xbox, satellite TV, Comcast On Demand, and many others). For more information on said other platforms, and for other bonus material not included in the film, check out filmmaker Laurie Kahn's web site.


  1. Good interviews!

    I, too, would like an in depth study to be done on why so many straight women read and write m/m romances. I have read both some interesting and uncomfortable responses to that question.

    At one point I heard someone say they did so because they could write without the same power dynamic problems that you get in m/f romance. I can totally understand that, because that can be a tough thing for a writer to navigate. And it is interesting to read and write romances where the gender-based power imbalance is non-existent.

    But I've also heard women say they read/write it "because it's hot", which is...uncomfortable for me. That's where it moves into objectification.

    I'm super glad that there are options other than an Alpha hero in romances nowadays. I find I can tolerate Alphas less and less the more I read. I am far more interested in beta heroes. Or at least Alphas who are aware of their own privileges and don't abuse them. But the explosion of billionaires/NA/werewolves etc books, which all seem to be almost entirely populated by powerful Alphas (with bonus 'broken women', particularly in NA). No matter how strong you write your heroine, the power dynamic will always be in his favour, and I just can't deal with it.

    Anyway, good stuff! I hope I can find some time to sit down and watch the whole film soon!

    1. Thaks, Aislinn, for sharing hour thoughts. I, too, have heard the m/m appeal is due to the "gender-free" power dynamics that can be featured in a m/m romance. Not sure I buy that line; I think there are power differentials in many relationships, including ones between men.

      I'd be interested in digging deeper into the reasons behind the "because its hot" response. Is it only objectification? Or is there something else that makes a m/m romance hot for heterosexual women? I've been wondering if part of the hotness is due to the fact that men can more easily show their feelings in m/m romance than in hetero? Often in hetero romance, the woman has to do the emotional work, but in m/m, there is no woman, so at least one of the men has to be open to doing emotional connection stuff...

      Yeah, I'm not a fan of the alpha hero, especially if his alpha-ness is proved in large part by his ability to protect/take care of/dominate his female love interest. But it's a fantasy that still appeals to many female readers, as the popularity of billionaire/NA/shifter romances attest to. I'm glad there is room in the market for many different types of masculinity, even while I'm aware that the types I tend to prefer are usually not the MOST popular.

      Think you'll enjoy the film if you find the time to watch it.

    2. Oh, I definitely agree there can still be imbalanced power dynamics! Particularly when you bring in race, class, etc. But at least in m/m you are eliminating one source of it? I'm not sure. I honestly haven't read much m/m. If I'm not reading m/f, I prefer f/f.

      I'm not sure if I would agree about the "more easily showing their feelings" thing. In many of the ones I've read the men are often repressed and in denial about being gay or attracted to a man. But maybe I'm just reading the wrong ones!

      And I do tend to gravitate towards m/f books where the men are a little more in touch with their emotions and giving. But that's probably by choice! They tend to be the kind of male characters I write, too, so it's obvious I have a type. ;)

      And, yes, it's great that romance is so vast and varied! Something for everyone! I do love books that twist those classic 'Alpha male' tropes, though. Female billionaires, virgin heroes in NA, etc.