In this article I provide a brief tour of the history of romance, in appreciation for its pioneers through the ages–storytellers and listener, authors and reader.
I discuss how our passion for this genre impacts its evolution. These are the highlights starting with medieval romantic literature (not the love story’s first appearance in history).
The romance novels in original medieval literature were about courtly love and written for women. In them, knights fought battles similar to those in the medieval male-oriented epic dramas. But these were stories for women; the knights fought for love of their ladies. Some translators of the medieval classics were Victorians who may have reinvented the original portrayals.
When you compare the English with French translations you find these discrepancies. The fascinating research of historian, Norma Lorre Goodrich, has done this and much more to shed light on the Dark Age of Britain. Her work also serves to raise the estimation of woman in the literature of this period from the lesser understanding of the Victorians. They wrote from a limited knowledge of myth and legend, but Goodrich unearthed proof that these stories were based in fact and later altered.
Fast forward to the narratives of romance in the 1700′s: authors of the woman’s novel during this period seemed more interested in persuading readers toward religiosity than in fostering a pure interest in woman’s literature. Female characters, like the heroine in Daniel Defoe’s Roxana, were often depicted as ‘one of the newly fascinating evil women‘.
The 1800′s brought us closer to the classic version of the romance novel. We easily recognize them in literary works by Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte, although romance and other authors of their time were critical of Austen, including Bronte herself.
The late 1800-early 1900 publishing revolution helped popularize the genre to a marked degree with its accessible dime novel. The Victorian romance, even colored as it was by a socially restrictive and sometimes religious voice, began to more closely resemble the great read we enjoy today. Then, as now, the true romance novel always leaves readers feeling emotionally satisfied, even if a few of them do finish with nontraditional endings.
The genre’s evolution is exploding as never before with the burgeoning of the e-publishing industry of the 21st Century. We have more choices of sub-genres and titles now than our mothers and grandmothers had in the prosperous mid to late 1900′s.
In a recession, what people want is a happy ending. ~ Motoko Rich
The sales today are astounding, especially viewed during tough economic times. The housing and automobile industry among others may be flat, but not romance publishing. Sales for this giant industry were last tallied by RWA at $1.375B in 2007 . Some reports show it is now $1.5B, but I could not find citations for the new figures.
Yet it would be an unfair to suggest the history of the romance novel might evolve to include those headlines as fact, and later become part of a tradition that seeks to understand our present epoch.
I’m questioning, not necessarily opposing, the media’s basis for proclaiming that romance novel sales are up because people want to escape the difficult economy. The economy is overused in headlines. It’s also the new alternative to polite discussions about weather.
Has anyone offered proof positive that the sales of romance novels are up because of this economy as Mr. Rich of The Times suggests? How would analysts measure this assumption if it could be tested?
Even markers that predicted the downturn were part of data that got lost in the reporting during the initial collapse, only to be resurrected like a rabbit out of the hat to help us feel better. ‘Look, the data now shows an upturn; the recession won’t take as long to turn around as we said it would.’
It would be great if that data was finely tuned enough to show details of romance sales in relation to all this.
In my version of history, I wouldn’t put much faith in headlines that say we are buying romance only to escape the present doom and gloom. The genre has already stood very well on its own, and appears to be living in its own sphere. Having already created such an aura of strength, it stands to reason that this is why it’s doing well, in spite of the economy, not because of the economy.
But fun is fun, and in this frolicking segment from the ABC News May 16 airing of Good Morning America the hosts did a fine job with playing to that headline. I agree, the romance novel is something to celebrate in these otherwise dark times. They quote Harlequin’s annual sales at the time of the broadcast being at $130M, releasing 1200 new titles a year.
We can agree that money talks, but the detractors of romance die hard. Part of our recent history includes feminists who caution about this genre being psychologically harmful. Although they and a good part of academia and the media portray it as escapist literature, readers from all walks of life understand full well the role this genre plays in their lives. Those of us in the know just smile and enjoy without apology.
I agree with Char Lengyel who said that she personally finds no disappointment with any apparent disparity between fantasy and the challenges and issues of real life relationships. And I’d bet that most who read romance also don’t worry about the ‘safety’ of doing so, or about pulling off the ‘wonder’ of still living relatively productive and happy lives.
Let me ask those who worry that romance readers may somehow become damaged by the fantasy: if their husbands and guy pals spend weekends watching or playing sports, do you similarly caution them?
I can just see pharmaceutical companies taking note of these rampant addictions, developing new pills to cure us from, Saints preserve us, romance and football! They could do a commercial with music from the old Jefferson Airplane song, “one pill makes you larger….” Oh wait a minute, they did that one, in blue! We should ask for valentine shaped one in ruby red.
My advice: beware big bad wolves wearing 20th Century sheepskins, waving 18th Century cautionary tales and crying, ‘Don’t be that evil woman, you Roxana, you!’
Thankfully, humanity has fostered its collective creative urge despite attempts of patriarchal and organizational shepherds to do so for us.
I also appreciate being fortunate to have an evolving technology at my fingertips that keeps relative pace with the expansion of my creativity as I dance to keep relative pace with it, and for its power to connect me with my global community.
And I value my intelligence and reason to see both the usefulness and past usefulness of movements that just may need to reinvent themselves. Everyone, like it or not, is having to adapt to a hybrid culture that is far beyond and even brighter than anything foreseen for this time.
All of this hopefully helps us understand the importance of upholding our natural freedom to express and enjoy authentic living. If that includes the freedom to revel in the romance genre in its past, present and evolving forms, then perhaps we have learned from its history after all.
**************
I found an enjoyable review of the genre’s history given by Susan Williams, GRCC Assistant Professor of History in this YouTube video. It’s Williams’ dissertation, “Dreadful Novels” to Feminist Lit? A History of the Romance Novel. I appreciate Williams’ insights on the important role Romance plays throughout woman’s history.
Though this lecture is rather long, it’s an entertaining speech for its serious venue. You can play it like a podcast while you do other things, you don’t really need to watch the video screen to follow it. If you’re a serious devotee of this most popular form of literature, you’ll find it worthwhile.
