tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post8223914281423632305..comments2024-03-28T07:00:12.226-04:00Comments on Romance Novels for Feminists: Reporting from the Popular Romance Author SymposiumJackie C. Hornehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04146684628443152376noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-52664149347830771792013-11-06T09:34:31.501-05:002013-11-06T09:34:31.501-05:00Oh yes, duh! I meant self-pubbing. Don't kno...Oh yes, duh! I meant self-pubbing. Don't know how I missed that. Thanks for pointing that out!Jen Loisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-22102700816960881602013-11-02T13:01:48.272-04:002013-11-02T13:01:48.272-04:00I don't know whether it's you or Crusie, b...I don't know whether it's you or Crusie, but I think you mean 'self-publishing' when you talk about 'e-publishing'. If you're an author with a digital publisher, you are not expected to do all those things. You write the book, just like you do for a print publisher. Then the publisher deals with the rest.Roshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02669423378438380019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-19409274947143173162013-11-01T21:46:55.283-04:002013-11-01T21:46:55.283-04:00One more thing to add: Jennifer Crusie's categ...One more thing to add: Jennifer Crusie's categorization of Harelquin as patriarchal included an intereseting analogy to heterosexual family relations: in the 1950s (which until recently was the Harlequin model, she argued), wives got an "allowance" from their husbands, who controlled the resources in the families. This was an okay deal for some wives in that context, which is why they traded this subordination for being taken care adequately. That's why, in Crusie's view, many authors stayed at Harlequin in that period--they were being compensated adaquately (though still exploited compared to other genres/publishing houses), but that was the structure of romance, so it was an okay deal, given the alternatives. When Crusie talked about e-publishing, she made the comparison to the feminist revolution of the 60s and 70s: suddenly wives had more freedom and more opportunity to do more things (i.e., authors can avoid many constraints of the uber-controlling publishing industry by e-pubbing), however the flip side of that is wives started to have to do it all--career, housework, childcare, etc (i.e., e-pubbing requires authors to write, market, publicize, design covers, etc--they have to do it all). So Crusie summed up by saying something like, "you have more freedom, but you'll probably not make any money" or something like that. She was pretty mixed on the freedoms of e-publishing, because it holds so many of the same elements as the stalled "feminist revolution." That leads to her ending comments in the roundtable discussion that as long as women are second-class citizens, romance will continue to be looked down upon. I loved that piece of her talk! (In a loved-it/hated-it kind of way!)Jen Loisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-88223840610985910242013-11-01T03:39:28.977-04:002013-11-01T03:39:28.977-04:00I specially like the recommendations on how to tal...I specially like the recommendations on how to talk about romance novels. I will have to think a little more about them. <br />I use some of them to help other romance readers out of the closet. Or when I talk about genre books (not only romance novels but also Sci-Fi, for instance) with other book lovers.<br />For instance, comparing to other genres. But I do also compare it with other popular cultural products as for instance movies. Blockbusters versus artsy movies.<br />And I do always bring gender, I find it's a way of render people speechless.Joanenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-47447732956265425462013-10-31T23:20:18.336-04:002013-10-31T23:20:18.336-04:00What a great summary! (Of course, the one thing yo...What a great summary! (Of course, the one thing you left out was the presentation by an independent scholar on changing usage of the word feminism by romance authors--one of my favorite topics that weekend) Wonderful to meet you!Joanna Gregsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-48350598229608722652013-10-31T13:22:12.346-04:002013-10-31T13:22:12.346-04:00Thanks for allowing me to live vicariously through...Thanks for allowing me to live vicariously through your participation. It sounds most informative and has given me things to ponder.enrage_femmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08519083598367295017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-74379966680046670732013-10-31T11:06:45.299-04:002013-10-31T11:06:45.299-04:00Thanks for posting this detailed summary! Sounds l...Thanks for posting this detailed summary! Sounds like a great conference. Let's hope there are plenty more such! Pamela1740http://badassromance.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-58222892491960321192013-10-31T09:46:14.870-04:002013-10-31T09:46:14.870-04:00Thanks, Jen. It was great to meet you both, too. I...Thanks, Jen. It was great to meet you both, too. I really enjoyed hearing a sociological take on why romance is so stigmatized. And am looking forward to your many future publications on romance and its authors!Jackie C. Hornehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04146684628443152376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-630346294397505634.post-23175439165113440122013-10-30T18:43:29.018-04:002013-10-30T18:43:29.018-04:00Great summary, Jackie, thanks for posting (and inc...Great summary, Jackie, thanks for posting (and including the pic!). Jo and I had a great time meeting you and loved your fabulous presentation on feminism in romance!Jen Loisnoreply@blogger.com