Bookish-Dreaming

Where Gillian Rants (paranormally)

by

Gillian Polack

“I don’t read paranormal books or urban fantasy,” a friend told me a while back. “I read literature, and I read horror.” She hadn’t actually picked a paranormal romance up. For her, the name of the sub-genre was enough to make her not want to touch it. A horror writer friend of mine confessed to something similar, but her reasons were more valid: she doesn’t particularly read to be amused and one of the hallmarks of the lighter end of the paranormal/urban fantasy spectrum is a sense of humour. That’s the lighter end. The darker end is as horror as it comes. This got me thinking. Why can there be such a gulf between the books paranormal romance writers write and what those who don’t read paranormal romances think they write?

I’m presented with stray literary views on a regular basis. I teach short courses and most of my friends are unreformable book addicts. The comments about anything seen as women’s lit and especially seen as paranormal romance tend to be increasingly negative. My response? I’ve taken to asking people what they’ve read, to get it into some perspective.

Far too many “I will not read this!” people around me express opinions on the literacy of the writers. If they’re being generous they assume the writers are hack. Most of them haven’t opened the volume in question to check this assumption. They judge the book by its cover, quite literally.

Now, I couldn’t accept this particular verdict sight unseen, so I took it on myself (ah, the pain!) to read a sample of books by a selection of writers. They cover a fair swath of the spectrum: from what I evilly define as the Sophie Kinsella end of the urban fantast/paranormal (which I have also taken to calling ‘happy vampire books’) to the very serious, dark (but hopeful) and often redemptive end of the spectrum (Marjorie Liu). I hate to tell my friends this tremendous sadness that will ruin their lives, but none of the writing was bad. Some of the writing was, in fact, superb. Good writers are quite capable of writing urban fantasy or paranormal romance the way bad writers are perfectly capable of writing literary fiction.

I feel as if I ought to enter into a vituperative rant. Why are we judging the books by the cover?

The covers are designed to place books on shelves and help them move from shelves very quickly, so they reinforce the notion that these books semi-erotic (only some of them are—and a few, especially the latter volumes of Laurell K Hamilton's Anita Blake series—R rated) and for women readers of a certain type. What type is this? (I’m in the mood for obvious questions.) The type who likes gorgeous men looking soulfully into their eyes, or who likes a cartoon vampiress looking worried, or who likes the action heroine’s back tastefully tattooed. All of these covers are fashionable and pull a particular kind of reader in.

Some of the books fit the cover rather nicely. Gerry Bartlett’s cartoon vampiress fits the premise of her books, that her vamp was turned when she had PMS and has had issues with it ever since. It’s light comedy. Marjorie Liu has an action heroine on the cover and on the pages. Others are less precise: Lynn Viehl's DreamVeil* has a male torso on the cover, yet the book is a character study in a half-hidden science fictional world.

The covers reinforce some similarities between the books. Most of these similarities show what genre the books belong to, and most of them do belong near each other on a shelf, whether it’s on a romantic comedy shelf or a dark action-adventure with romance shelf. However, they also cry out to new readers “Don’t touch me.”

Keri Arthur was the one who broke my bias about paranormal romance and its kind. She said to me “Read my book” and gave me a copy to make sure I did. I read it properly and with due care (as one does, when the book is a gift, kindly signed by the author) and from there read many more books. I discovered (and felt embarrassed that it was something I had to discover) that the range of writing in paranormal romance is huge and the common themes hide some wonderful differences.

I’m not going to make a list of recommendations. I’ve read maybe a dozen writers. Maybe more. In fact, probably more. I’m only just beginning to see how the classifications I carried as a pretentious outsider don’t actually reflect the choices writers are making. I don’t know enough yet to write the ultimate article in classification and comment. I do know enough to be able to say that some of the people who give me their thoughts need to either do more reading or to stop indicating that they really have not a clue. The only one of my friends who got it right was the friend who had those very specific reasons for not reading the genre. Her reading is all at the dark end of the spectrum. This means that the gentle humour in some paranormal romances isn’t going to give her any enjoyment whatsoever, and that happy (or moderately happy) endings aren’t something she wants from a book.

Some of the books I read were sheer delight from beginning to end. Fine writing, tense situations, interesting twists, fabulous characterisation. Some were beach reading. Some weren’t really paranormal romance (and I have an interview with urban fantasy writers coming up soon, so maybe the writers will explain their approach to genre a little) but were simply slotted into that part of the shelf by an enthusiastic bookseller. There’s a wonderful range of writing to be discovered underneath those paranormal covers.

It’s beginning to really annoy me when someone says “I’m not going to try these authors.” They head for the newest Winton and don’t stop to think that some of the writing skills and interesting tales they love in their more literary fiction can also be found elsewhere. Obviously editors know and publishers know. Why don’t my friends and acquaintances know? The answer to that is very long and can wait until another day.

I’m finished ranting. I need some coffee.

Note: Viehl aided my investigation entirely unwittingly. She has book giveaways on her blog and sent me a Liu and a copy of her own book as part of one. Likewise, Keri Arthur had no idea she was changing my mind about a whole sub-genre: we met at a science fiction convention and were talking about very different things when I admitted I hadn’t read her work. Neither of them are responsible for anything foolish I’ve said here—it’s all my own work.

Authors mentioned in this column:
Gerry Bartlett
Keri Arthur
Laurell K Hamilton
Lynn Viehl
Marjorie Liu
Sophie Kinsella

 

Gillian Polack is based in Canberra, Australia. She is mainly a writer, editor and educator. Her most recent print publications are a novel (Life through Cellophane, Eneit Press, 2009), an anthology (Masques, CSfG Publishing, 2009, co-edited with Scott Hopkins), two short stories and a slew of articles. Her newest anthology is Baggage, published by Eneit Press (2010).One of her short stories won a Victorian Ministry of the Arts award a long time ago, and three have (more recently) been listed as recommended reading in international lists of world's best fantasy and science fiction short stories. She received a Macquarie Bank Fellowship and a Blue Mountains Fellowship to work on novels at Varuna, an Australian writers' residence in the Blue Mountains. Gillian has a doctorate in Medieval history from the University of Sydney. She researches food history and also the Middle Ages, pulls the writing of others to pieces, is fascinated by almost everything, cooks and etc. Currently she explains 'etc' as including Arthuriana, emotional cruelty to ants, and learning how not to be ill. She is the proud owner of some very pretty fans, a disarticulated skull named Perceval, and 6,000 books. Contact Gillian.

 


 

 
Contact Us || Site Map || || Article Search || © 2006 - 2012 BiblioBuffet