Friday, April 06, 2007

apparently the eternal debate.

Well it seems some authors are getting chastised for their heroes screwing other chicks during the course of the book. All i can say to that is been there, done that. The Eververse series was rejected for that very reason from pretty much ALL the big e pubs (and TOR) and yet, the damn book has sold over 100 copies in print in the past three weeks from Amazon, and its gotten some amazing reader reviews as well.
I think thats pretty damn good for a book one e pub said "had a hastily thrown together world, Characters that had no depth and a hero who's sexual exploits will turn the reader off. Good luck ever getting it published."
Polyamourous pursuits are fine with me. And to our own credit, Fallon's sexual adventures prove to identify him as a person, and his personality, and helps him make a decision later on in the book for the benefit of all parties. Hes not just screwing for screwing's sake really, theres a bigger scope to the story.
Im not trying to justify what he does, he does that very well on his own, only explain to those out there still locked in the "one guy, one girl romance" that things are changing. the amount of people in RL that have only been with one person is in the minority, and aud and I like to think we write true to life. lets not forget, Fallon, along with Feyd, Arcady, Cash and the rest of the guys (and girls for that matter) are residents of a sub-society, a culture that runs on sex, blood and money more so then regular human existence.
One guy, One girl is outdated and more in the realm of fantasy then you know. (right, like that millionare art gallery owner with the cocky attitude didnt have an orgy a la American Psycho style the night before he met his heroine? Show me that, it helps to give me a feel for the REAL character, because no one is as good and pious as they make them in literature.)
And another thing, If you can handle it in your TV and your movies, why not your books as well? I mean I know the general pulp reading public can handle it (hello... Anita Blake anyone?) but why are they getting so starchy about e book? Aren't we supposed to be paving the way for the new literature? Why is it people can handle threesomes, orgies and 5 ways, but hen the Hero gets down before getting down with the heroine people's panties get in a twist? I mean come on, when that happens in a book i take it that the hero is a very sexual person, and that when he gets his heroine (insert you favorite genre here) hes either gotta quell that need and fire to get past her virginal defenses, or square with the fact that the chick was probably just as big a ho as he was before they got together... honestly no man that LOOKS like these heroes would be saving it for their true love... (unless they are batting for the other team, but im not getting into that.) So come on people.. be realistic.

OK So if you enjoyed my rant, and are curious about Sugar and Sin and seeing why the publishers were wrong, pop by Amazon and pick it up. Then if you hated it, leave us a review, and if you loved it, leave us a review. Either way, i prove a point.

S

3 comments:

Katrina Strauss said...

You and I have discussed this better, and you know I can go either way on it...it depends on the story, really. I posted my thoughts over at SmartBitches and thought I'd share here, too, though I'll add a follow-up comment which I did not include there.

I think it depends largely on why one reads romance. If you are in a less-than-desirable relationship, or not in one at all, and read romance to fulfill fantasies of your ideal mate, and your idea of the ideal mates includes monogamy/loyalty/faithfulness, then no, you’re not going to want to see the lead male boink outside of his established relationship.

However, if you have more lenient ideas and ascribe to open relationships, polyamory, group sex, and/or if you read erotica/romance to fulfill kink fantasies, then you may very well enjoy seeing the lead male demonstrate his virility and skill in wooing multiple partners.

In two of my own novels, I feature a few menage scenes where the lead male or lead female enjoys relations with another partner—at the behest of their primary partner. I’ve been told these are the hottest love scenes in the books! In another novel of mine, the lead female messes around with another gentleman behind her boyfriends back. Yet she and her boyfriend have not agreed specifically on monogamy, and she does not actually have intercourse or hold any feelings for this other partner. In fact, her few moments of spontaneous indiscretion lead her to realize she truly cares for her boyfriend, and well I won’t give the plot away but let’s just say maybe he knew what she was doing all along anyway and manipulated events in his own favor.

With that being said, I’ve chosen to keep one lead male’s pre-relationship exploits off-camera, as I felt readers would not particularly care to see this particular gentleman with any other woman than his lead girly. Although he encourages her to get with other lovers while he watches, but well, that’s different.

I think there we have enough variety of readers out there, including many who want to see something different that defies traditional formula. It's a damned shame the industry can't be more open and allows a certain camp of readers to dominate the market, when plenty of us want to see change.

~ Katrina S.

Tehya said...

I personally believe that few people are actually monogamous. The wanting it is real, yet it seldom happens. I read both. Neither upsets me. Reading is where I can do things I never can, live within the imaginative world which talented authors can take me. I choose not to limit my imagination.

Kayleigh J. said...

You've hit the nail on the head here, Stel.

I think the romance genre IS changing, as are its readers, but slowly. Way back when it was unthinkable for a heroine to be anything other than a virgin when she meets her hero. Nowadays, depending upon the sub-genre, most readers find virgin heros unrealistic and unbelievable. I write primarily historical romance myself, so for the most part my heroines are virgins at the start of the story, but I have written a handful of contemporary pieces and not one of my heroines in those has been a virgin at the start of the story.

Let's face it, infidelity and polyamory have been around since the dawn of time, and quite frankly unless you want your hero to be a bumbling clueless idiot in the sack, he needs to have had some experience, either off camera or on. I like to write about rakes and playboys who finally find "the one" who can settle them down. Sometimes their previous exploits are before the start of the book, sometimes they are during. Hell, one of my current WIPs, Chasing Heaven, the sequel to Leading Her to Heaven, begins with our hero in a deserted hallway trying to get it on with one of the local ladies, who is NOT his ultimate heroine. Another WIP, Shaded Destiny, begins with our hero banging everything with breasts because a fortune telling gypsy once told him a woman would save his soul, and he thinks the only way to know this special woman when he finds her is...well, up close and personal inspection.

I like to write my characters realistically, and some times that means showing them with partners OTHER than their ultimate intended. Have I been criticized for it? Of course. I've also been told my heroines are too fiesty, my characters too flawed (they shouldn't have made that really stupid decision that forms the basis for the entire plot, you see), etc. You can't please everyone.

Having read Sugar & Sin, and having known beforehand about the criticism you received, I can say that I don't find Feyd and Fallon's actions out of character. In fact, I believe they enhance their development and ultimately strengthen the bonds they form when they find their heroines.