Room for everyone???
May 31st, 2007 by Edie Ramer
The usually quiet RWAorg loop has been buzzing about the proposed changes for the GH/RITA contests on erotica and novellas. Many of the erotica writers believe they can’t get fair marks when the genres are lumped together, that too many non-erotica writers score them on their prejudices instead of the writing. They went on to say this is symptomatic of the way RWA looks down on them. Other non-erotica writers pooh-poohed this.
This didn’t turn into a flame war. No Rosie O’Donnell-Elisabeth Hasselbeck blow up. Madeline Hunter, for one, was a fabulous voice of reason. They could use her in politics, except too many readers would miss her books.
I like Allison Brennan’s solution. Instead of putting erotica in a separate category, judges can opt out on sexually explicit books. Like Michelle Diener says, “the level of sexual content isn’t the issue, the HEA is.”
I’m going one step further, because I think we can have a love story without a HEA. The real issue is the writing. Is the book great? In the end, that’s all that should count. Some of the greatest love stories–like Romeo and Juliet and Gone With the Wind–have sad endings.
I’m not getting into the erotica fray, mostly because I don’t write it. Hard work goes into every page, whether it’s a seething, pulsing love scene or a hand-holding walk on the beach. But one proposed change that concerns me is dropping the Romantic Elements category from the GH while leaving it on the RITA. This is the market that’s growing while the traditional romance is shrinking. Women’s fiction, paranormal, urban fiction, thrillers–these are what agents and editors say they’re looking for. All books with a strong romantic element. The romance might not be the central story, but without it, there would be no book.
Doesn’t it seem the smart thing for RWA to do is grow with the industry?
What’s your opinion on any of this? Or do you even care?
48 Responses to “Room for everyone???”
The RITA/GH recommendations are schizophrenic. Some categories are being dumped because they don’t heed the core purpose of the RITAs/GHs honoring the best ROMANCE NOVELS (Novella Category, Rom El in GH) while some categories are retained despite this core purpose (Rom El in RITA, YA in both RITA and GH). The lack of consistency kind of puts a stink on the whole thing for me, as well as absolutely no willingness to even DO the survey to find out how many PAN members would be willing to read ebooks in the RITAs.
One more day to send comments!
Jody, IMO you’d think RWA would learn after the last brouhaha when they tried to define romance. You nailed it by saying it’s the lack of consistency that stinks.
I already sent in my comments, but I hope anyone who hasn’t will do so–especially if you agree with me.
It is funny, when I saw the proposal that the RE category be dropped, I was completely taken aback. I think of myself as a happy RWA member, and then suddenly, it was like they were saying my writing wasn’t welcome anymore. I’m sure this isn’t what was meant, but surely novels with a strong romantic element can only strengthen the romance genre? They may lead readers into the ’straight’ romance market. So I can’t understand why RWA would want to predjudice unpublished members writing for the RE market. Oh well, I’ve sent in my comments, I hope there are enough like-minded people to change the Board’s mind.
Michelle, I do too. And like Jody says, keeping it in the RITA is really a slap in the face to their not-yet-pubbed members.
RWA’s defense is that they asked for comments and didn’t get many. Maybe the reason they didn’t get many was because nobody saw a problem. RWA members aren’t afraid to voice their opinion and write emails. If we didn’t like something, we’d say so.
Sorry, I also want to say, if like me, there are other writers who joined RWA writing romance, and then somewhere along the way discovered we were better suited to RE, does RWA really want us to leave the organization? I don’t think so. What benefit would it be to anyone for RE writers to join another writing organization or start their own? I don’t see it as being in my interests, and I don’t think it’s in RWA’s interests either.
Guess that was waiting to come out, I usually keep my mouth shut no matter what my thoughts
.
Bravo, Edie! Great blog, and this topic is close to all of us here. And you nailed it, when you said a good love story doesn’t have to have a HEA. I agree with this, so much. I’ll tell ya, I’ve read many books during my lifetime, and the changes in the market ran the gamut. One in particular changed the way I saw romance, and it influenced me as a writer. Barbara Delinsky wrote a novel titled, Three Wishes, I think it was. I read it years ago. But it describes what you’re saying about romance without a HEA. Life is raw sometimes, and knocks you for a loop. It opened my eyes to the possibilites, I tell ya. Over the years, my work has evolved into what I write now. So far, the HEA is present, but changed from what the reader might expect. I want to take my stories where they’re suppose to go, not where RWA dictates they should. Call me crazy, but if a Delinksy’s book like Three Whishes is on the romance/women’s fiction shelf, maybe our organization should drop the ropes and relax a little. Everything evolves, or it dies IMO. And I did send a polite letter of concern about the changes too.
Michelle, I agree. The reason they’re proposing to keep RE in the RITA is because they don’t want to alienate and lose writers like Susan Wiggs, Kristin Hannah, Julie Kenner. Yet they’re willing to alienate their unpublished counterparts. It doesn’t make sense to me either.
I’m hoping smarter brains will prevail and they’ll vote this down.
LaDonna, I remember that book! It’s my favorite Barbara Delinsky book. I was even thinking about it recently, lol.
Great comment about evolving or dying. I hope you said that in your polite letter.
It shows a lack of market awareness, especially when you consider the deletion of the novella category. Now granted, most short romance fiction being written — even though it’s fiscally rewarding — can’t be entered in the RITAs because of the ebook caveat. But the fact is, the market for short romance fiction is booming like it never has before, and short fiction has ALWAYS been considered a professionally valid choice in other types of literature. I keep mulling over what being “career focused” really means for a romance author. Does it mean writing traditional romance novels and trying to get them published by the big dogs but nowhere else because that’s the surest path to a 2K+ advance? Does it mean taking chances or trying some alternate routes to establish your career?
I wish I had too, Edie! That little phrase popped in my head while I was commenting today. hehe. But, I’m happy with the letter I sent anyway. And it doesn’t surprise me you read that book and loved it. Our minds wander the same path a lot.
RWA was created to help writers along on the difficult road to publishing. I don’t see how all of these new–insane–policy changes are meant to help anyone when they’re deliberately targeted to crush writers’ hopes and dreams before they ever had a chance. RWA isn’t a publishing company, a literary agency, or even an book-doctoring service. So, I don’t understand what gives them the right to say whose blood, sweat, and tears are good enough. It’s up to the industry to decide that. If RWA is following the money, then you’d think they’d pay attention to what the industry wants. If they’re up to their own agenda, then they need to be clear about that and stop hiding behind all these rules and regulations. It’s ridiculous and embarassing, and no wonder why other genres don’t take romance writers seriously.
The more the merrier, in my opinion. As long as we have some common element holding us together (ie. romance, whether it be traditional romance or romantic elements), diversity can only help us learn and grow as writers.
Jody, it does seem like everything you said is what some members do think. If so, they’re shortsighted. Look at the success of MaryJanice Davidson. Her ebooks became so popular the NY publishers couldn’t ignore her. Now she’s a bestselling writer. Traditional romance is still fine, but writers have more choices now. And a lot of RWA members are grabbing onto them, whether they’re novellas, erotica, romantic elements, inspirational. RWA should be celebrating these choices instead of saying they don’t belong.
LaDonna, we both like those quirky offbeat books. I think that says something about our personalities.
If RWA is following the money, then you’d think they’d pay attention to what the industry wants. If they’re up to their own agenda, then they need to be clear about that and stop hiding behind all these rules and regulations.
Marcia, this is seriously good. You should have written the blog today.
There is so much good about RWA, and I’m hoping they don’t vote in favor of a lot of these proposals. If they do, they’ll be alienating a lot of members.
Yay, Lindsay! You’ve probably seen comments on some of the historical RWA loops you’re on. I know several writers who’ve realized they’re writing Historical instead of Historical Fiction. They won’t be happy if the RE category is dropped, because that’s what they would probably enter in the GH.
So I will play the devil’s advocate.
It’s the RWA. Romance Writers of America. Not Erotic Romance or Romantic Elements Writers of America.
Should it be an inclusive organisation (in terms of genre)? Some will say yes, and some will say no.
At some point, it will come down to ideology versus following the money. Regarding the HEA, as someone who does bang my head against that very wall ALL THE TIME, I’ll say that there are people who think that if you remove the HEA requirement, you’re not following the money.
It is a valid point, as much as I wish it otherwise. There are many readers who expect a HEA if you have romance on the spine. Therefore if there isn’t a traditional HEA, why should the RWA be supporting the authors of those books?
This is an outsider’s view. I probably wouldn’t join the RWA even if I wrote romance.
May, the money is moving toward erotic books and RE. Editors are telling their writers to put in more sex scenes. Agents and editors are looking for different books from the traditional. The readership for traditional romances is shrinking, and in some places disappearing.
And about HEA, do I really have to bring up the guy writers, like Nicholas Sparks?
I think most of us are talking about books that have a strong romance, hence our desire to keep the Romantic Elements category.
May, the thing is, RWA tried to define romance a while back and got burned in the process. Romance means different things to different people. Some readers view a threesome with some SM thrown in to be a romance, others see romance as two people falling in love, and ending up happily married together. Some people will read what is essentially a mainstream book with a strong romantic element and call it a romance. So does the RWA become the umbrella organisation for these diverse incarnations of romance? I say, we’ve got the talent to, so why not? It has to strengthen the organisation to have more members, not less. But I think the most important thing of all is that RWA is not a company. It is a membership of writers. We are RWA. So if enough of us believe RE and novellas and anything else should be encouraged and recognized in the organisation, then they will be. Simple as that.
But romantic elements especially isn’t usually published as a Romance.
And for erotica, there’s the Erotica Authors Association.
Erotic romance does overlap. But I think that there shouldn’t be an Erotic Romance award. Allison Brennan’s solution is as good as it gets. It’s just my take on things, but I think a lot erotic romance authors, whether or not they want an erotic romance category, would rather have their books in the traditional subgenres, eg historical, paranormal etc.
Like I said, I’m just playing devil’s advocate. I don’t have anything invested in the whole enchilada.
Funnily enough, on another loop I’m on, someone was just complaining how much RE stuff IS published as romance. And she keeps being disappointed. The main culprit seems to be Urban Fantasy, and a lot of the authors on the loop said they had nothing to do with the label on the spine, although they take the flack from disappointed readers who thought they were getting a romance with HEA, and instead got RE with no happy ending.
Has anyone here ever tried to write erotica if that’s not the genre you’re used to? Try it. It’s damn hard (no pun intended!!). Although it’s not what I’m comfortable writing, my sex scenes are pretty steamy. Is it unreasonable to think RWA will kick me out in a year or two because they decide to make a new edit which says only mildly sensual authors get to join the club? Oh, I forgot. I also write RE. I might as well say goodby now.
Since we’re on a tear, I just read the Board’s proposed changes for PAN eligibility based on the number of dollars an author earns on one book. Okay, let’s see if I have this right. We’ll have PAN Elite and PAN Peons, I guess. Or worse, the non-Noras will get kicked out altogether.
Off my soapbox for now.
Liz, that is the reason why I don’t think there should be an erotic romance award. In the first place, how do you define hotness? Percentage of the book that is sex? How many people get into it at the same time?
Yeah. They do keep publishing female-authored urban fantasy as romance–and quite a few don’t even have a significant romance plot, just a heroine who whines about being single or something like that, which is why they are not considered RE in my book.
May, what Michelle says.
A lot of Women’s Fiction is on the Romance shelves, books that don’t necessarily have HEA. Also, paranormal, urban fiction, and so on.
I like Allison’s solution too. I don’t write erotica, but I do write explicit sex scenes. Sex is a part of life, especially for people attracted to one another, which is what romances are about.
Liz, your love scenes are very sensual, the best kind.
So funny about the PAN Elite. Instead of PAN Peons, the other group could be Pan Lite.
May, I can’t answer for Liz, but I don’t want to define “hotness”, not do I want RWA to do it. I agree that a lot of books with not much romance are found in Romance fiction. The booksellers put them there because it’s their version of the women’s ghetto. JMO
May, I hear what you’re saying, but I still subscribe to the notion that good writing is good writing no matter what it is. If you’re going to exclude erotica as a Rita category, then why not exclude the Inspirational ones with no sex? Does sex really define romance?
I think it comes down to the fact that more and more authors are writing erotica because that’s what’s hot right now (again – no pun intended). IMO, I don’t want my RE up against an erotica for the same reasons I don’t want it up against an Inspirational. Judge prejudice would have to come into play.
Edie, it’s official. PAN Lite is the new name!
Same read-less money!! LOL
May, I read too fast.
I think you and Liz are actually agreeing. I like your comment about the percentage of the book devoted to sex, and how many people are doing it together. I can imagine some anal writer counting the pages. 
Okay, Liz and May aren’t agreeing. I’m getting confused and better keep out of this.
I didn’t know about the women’s fiction because it’s contemporary…and I can’t remember the last straight contemp romance I picked up.
Edie, let me clarify this: there is a school of thought that is along the lines of “there will be enough reader backlash to stop romance publishers from publishing books without HEA as romance.” Presumably, the backlash will come in terms of falling book sales.
Despite my HEA rebellion (maybe we should start a group The HEA Rebels!), I have so far yet to see any sign that readers really don’t demand a HEA. Therefore opening the genre doors wider doesn’t seem to be the right thing to do at this point in time.
May, I love the HEA Rebels, although the romantic in me always gives my characters a HEA. I hope you’re coming to Nationals this year so we can continue this debate over a Texas-sized margarita.
Basically, I think all of us will agree that without writers like us, RWA would be nothing. On the flip side, I really appreciate a professional organization like RWA looking out for my best interests. I just wish there wasn’t so much snarkiness sometimes.
I’m not excluding erotica, Liz.
I’m saying that I don’t think that there should be an erotic romance GH/Rita. If they want to have such a category, they would have to define it.
How are they going to define it? How many pages in a 300 page book is sex? How many menages? How many toys?
It’s precisely because romance shouldn’t be defined by sex that I don’t want an erotic romance category.
I’ve no opinion on inspy because I don’t know anything about inspy.
And no, I’m not going to RWA. I’d need the money, and I’ll need bodyguards–besides Jane and Sybil and Kristie are going, and that’s all one RWA con can take.
May, if I’m expecting one thing and get another, I’m disgruntled too. The blurb and perhaps even the cover should make it clear what kind of book it is, no matter what shelf it’s on.
An HEA Rebel group sounds good to me. Consider me a member.
Liz, I’m with you on all the good things RWA does. Any organization, even the good ones, do stupid things sometimes.
And, May, if you come to Dallas, I’ll be your bodyguard.
In the words of the immortal Gilda Radner (Rosanna Rosannadanna) “Nevermind.” LOL
May, I do agree that defining erotica would be difficult. So many of us are writing multiple genres in one manuscript that I sometimes wonder how we enter contests at all. According to some publishers, though, they are looking for this type book – Historical Fantasy, Paranormal RS, Chick-lit Vampire, etc.
Here’s hoping we all get published this year so that our RE’s qualify for the RITA.
One of the most convincing arguments for the formation of the Erotic Romance category (which is different from Erotica) is that Erotic Romance is NOT merely a romance with more or hotter sex scenes any more than Romantic Suspense is a romance with a few cop scenes. In the same way Inspirationals are a separate category because the characters’ religious or spiritual beliefs are a major part in the developing relationship, well-written Erotic Romance focuses on the characters’ sexual journey in the context of the developing relationship. This additional story arc influences the narrative in a way that a suspense subplot differentiates Romantic Suspense novels from their mainstream sisters. However, Erotic Romances are still romances, just as Inspirational and Romantic Suspense novels are still romances.
As for how to differentiate an Erotic Romance from a romance with sizzle, I think that should be up to the author to decide which category it goes in, just as authors have to decide now. A new category is also the simplest way to ensure judges can avoid Erotic Romances in both the RITAs and the GH if they don’t want to read it. Otherwise it could appear anywhere and the judges would only have 10 days to return it.
I would love to have written the blog, Edie, but I think sometimes I get TOO real. That might scare away some of the readers.
I’m all for Jody’s idea and I don’t think it would take much of an effort to put it into practice. Is it because RWA is too lazy that they want to eliminate contest categories? Could the PAN 2K Earnings rule be part of the plan, too, to cull from the edges? Why RWA is trimming instead of fattening themselves up on industry information is a mystery to me. They’re receding faster than a fifty-year-old’s hairline. The only difference is that a fifty-something has an excuse. RWA doesn’t. They’re supposed to be our voices in the industry and lately, they’ve been doing a piss-poor job at it. Is the board childish enough to believe the best way to get our attention is to stir up a little controversy? As writers we’re taught to pay attention to the market and follow it like clockwork. When our general–RWA–isn’t taking its own advice, then what’s a writer to do other than mount a protest? We paid these people $75 to keep our best writing interests at heart. I guess their hearts are made of coal.
As for the whole HEA, books are a reflection of life around us. We mold and shape them into ideas of our own and that’s what makes them so entertaining. Unfortunately, not everyone has a HEA in life, so they shouldn’t be penalized for it. Who’s to say Romeo and Juliet’s romance was any less than When Harry Met Sally? Categorizing an entire story because of the ending means you’ve missed a darn good book between the pages. That’s what should matter most.
Jody and Marcia, I’m fine with an ER category. But did you read Kasey Michael’s post on RWAorg? (I know Jody’s following these posts, but I haven’t seen Marcia on the loop. I’m the lurker.)
For those who haven’t seen it, Kasey says trends come and trends go, and maybe labeling yourself so specifically might not be in your best interests. She says she writes “romance”. Her post was a lot longer and said it better, but I liked that.
Marcia, one of my favorite movies is Love Actually. Out of the many romances in the movie, the one that stuck in my mind afterward was Emma Thompson’s and Alan Rickman’s. I wondered what happened to them, whether they split or eventually got back together. So, yes, a HEA isn’t always the best ending. But I’m pretty sure RWA’s definition doesn’t include HEA.
I went on the RWA site, and here’s the short version of RWA’s definition of romance:
Two basic elements comprise every romance novel: a central love story and an emotionally satisfying and optimistic ending.
Not sure if all my books meet that criteria, but I’m not going to stress about it. To paraphrase Kasey Michaels, selling your books is what’s important, not winning contests. Even the GH and RITA.
Yeah, I’m comment #40! I don’t think I’ve ever seen it go this high.
Anyway, I never joined the RWAorg loop. At the rate things are going, I pretty sure I don’t want to. I’ve got all the loops I can handle right now. But in the end, Kasey is right. If you write a good book, nobody will care how it’s categorized. I, a hard-nosed anti-YA reader, never imagined picking up a Harry Potter book. Years later, I’m absolutely overjoyed about the Harry Potter amusement park they’re building in FL. JK Rowling won me over, so there’s no reason why we can’t do the same regardless of our genre.
Are there any minutes from the Board meetings where this stuff was discussed, or was it all in Executive Session? It’s like the same weirdness keeps creeping back into the Board’s proposals, and I, for one, would like to know who’s pushing this agenda so that I can vote against her.
Like others have pointed out, the policies aren’t consistent or logical, and it all smells like the product of some dysfunctional agenda.
Unless things get a lot better, this is my last year in RWA. Sad to say, but I just can’t keep putting my money and time into an organization that seems to be hostile toward a good portion of its membership.
Marcia, I love the idea of the Harry Potter theme park too. For one thing, it means he’s going to live. She can’t kill him and then have a theme park.
And we sure the hell can do it. Like you said on your blog, write the best book you can.
One of my blogs had a lot of comments when people posted the first line of one of their books, but I don’t think it reached 40. That was sometime last year, and I’m not looking it up.
Lynne, I don’t know about the minutes. You could ask your area representative. I know a committee made suggestions for the GH/RITA proposals, but someone on the committee has said they never recommended dropping the RE category from the GH, so that must have originated from the board.
Hopefully they’ll work it out. A LOT of people are upset about these proposals.
Wow. Controversy. My favorite. Great blog, by the way, Edie. And a thinker. I confess I haven’t been following the discussion on the loops … my head is in the sand right now and I haven’t been paying attention, but I personally have no problem with an erotica category. It’s the writing that should matter, not how many participants there are in the neighborhood orgy.
As far as RE goes … if and when “Darkness” gets published, that’s a category it’ll fall into. Its an urban fantasy with romantic elements. I’m not saying there won’t be an HEA … eventually, but perhaps not in this first story.
Thanks, Liz! A lot of people have opinions. When BOOBS gets published, I’ll be in the same RE category. Wouldn’t it be fun if we finaled at the same time? They have to keep that category so it can happen.
Crap, hope I’m not too late to chime in. The day of Edie’s blog, I was with a good looking doctor. But, enough about me. On to RWA’s proposals.
First, the erotica debate. I like erotic scenes, but, not sure about an entire book full. The only full blown erotica I ever read was Delta of Venus by Anais Nin.
I think there should be specific judges for each category. For instance, judges who get SRE should judge them, etc., etc. I think many got burned when their entry went to a narrow-minded, only wants to see romance and nothing but romance, judge. Therefore, people who read erotica should be the ones judging it.
RWA’s proposals leave a nasty taste in my mouth. They’re creating a divisive ground. To me, they’re afraid to move forward – they shun change.
Without change there is no growth.
Writing is writing; a creative spirit that shouldn’t be pigeoned holed. Rather, let it be the common denominator.
Kath, I kind of like someone’s idea of a “opt in”, saying what we want to judge. RWA will decide not to exclude RE from the GH.
And if you’re going to have a doctor, it’s great to have a good looking one.
Edie,
My opinion is that RWA is being really shortsighted about this. You’re right, the market is changing and RWA should be shifting along to keep our business thriving, instead they always seem they they’re about a dozen steps behind.
I will admit, If I was a member of RWA, the whole RE category missing from GH but not the Rita would feel like a slap in the face to me. IF they are going to discard a category, it should be consistant. Otherwise it smacks of eliteism.