Originally, this thread was about a question frequently asked -- is this a paranormal romance or not -- and to provide information for that question and allow others to provide information. However, that conversation is clearly not going to occur. So the thread topic has been changed to what the members wanted to talk about with a new title.
Last edited by KatG; August 29th, 2012 at 08:58 PM.
From your comments on other threads, I get the impression that your personal definition for PNR doesn't quite conform to the definition/definitions most often used by the rest of the sff or romance reading worlds......
I think what you are talking about could be more accurately called something like "classically structured romance novel with paranormal elements", or something like that. The term "PNR", though, is normally applied to a much broader range of books than just those with a classically romantic plot structure.
Last edited by Contrarius; August 27th, 2012 at 03:54 PM.
I'm not sure what this thread is. Is it a discussion thread? Parts of the OP made it sound like a simple game of "Here's a book! Is it PNR?" and I don't know if you'd consider it a hijack to talk about where we see the line being drawn.
So -- onto the games! ROUND ONE:
MaryJanice Davidson's Betsy Taylor, Vampire Queen series, starting with Undead and Unwed. Is it PNR? Just so we're clear, no one has argued that it's UF, though some people have classed it "Paranormal Chick-Lit." So the judges will accept "It's not PNR, it's PCL" as an answer.
1) A romance novel is a story about the development of a romance. That's been the definition of romance (as opposed to romantic fiction, which can be anything from female comedy to Anna Karenina,) for a very long time. It is a general content designation. It does not mean that other novels can't be romantic, even though the main story is about other things than the development of a romance.
2) Romance fans are not nearly as picky as fantasy fans about romantic content. They are happy to review, talk about and romance media market to fans a variety of works -- mysteries, fantasy, horror, contemporary drama, etc. as romantic works if they have a decent romantic sub-plots. They will do this even with works written by men about men.
In contrast, many fantasy fans are concerned about works written by women. They do not apply the term romance to works written by men, especially about men, even if the story is in fact a romance about the development of a romance. I have never witnessed anyone asking if a work clearly written by a man is a paranormal romance. The question about whether a title is or is not a paranormal romance is not being asked by romance fans, who don't care if it is or it isn't specifically about a romance. It's being asked by people who believe women always or nearly always write about romance and want to know just how much romance is in a title written by a woman, especially if it is about a woman.
3) Many romance writers do both paranormal romance and contemporary fantasy, dark fantasy, and/or comic fantasy, etc., often with strong romantic sub-plots, although that's not required. (Also mystery, etc.) And because they do that, their non-romance works are cross-marketed to their romance fans, even if the titles are not paranormal romance. Mary Jo Davidson, for instance, who was mentioned in the other thread, is a romance and paranormal romance writer. She also writes comic fantasy stories, sometimes with a romantic bent, although romantic usually in a farcical way. Betsy the Vampire Queen, which was mentioned of hers, is a comic fantasy series that is then also marketed to Davidson's romance fans. Which is perfectly fine. But saying Davidson can only write romance novels is a little restrictive, don't you think?
4) Paranormal romance was not a term invented by fans. It was invented by romance publishers. It is a category market designation. Many paranormal romance lines are run in conjunction with and in the exact same way as category lines like Harlequin Presents, etc. And they are all most definitely focused on the development of a romance. Romance series, in which you have one couple and then a character from that world is part of the next couple in the next book, have been exceedingly popular in romance, long before they went whole hog on fantasy romance. And they continue to do those series for paranormal romance. These series are different from mystery thriller series in which a continuing detective character (who may be male or female, human or something else,) deals with mysteries, conspiracies and threats and has to figure out what to do to save people, her/himself, the world, etc. Mystery-thrillers often have a very strong romantic component -- the male detective saves his girlfriend and tells her he loves her, etc. Sex often happens often, especially in noir. But the stories are not about the romance.
5) Because cross-marketing is so useful, and because paranormal romance and contemporary fantasy expanded at around the same time, along with the expansion and development of a horror category market, publishers happily tossed contemporary fantasy in with paranormal romance shelves that were opened for the romance market, paranormal romance onto fantasy, dark fantasy/horror shelves, etc., etc., and marketed everything to everybody. Again, nothing wrong with this, and female contemporary fantasy writers, while often surprised that they were being marketed as romance writers as well as fantasy writers, appreciated having lots of romance fans. But these women were then rather disconcerted to find that many fantasy fans regarded them as romance writers only who were invading fantasy's turf and weren't "real" fantasy writers. And it has become a litmus test for any female writer coming into contemporary fantasy and often in other areas such as historical and secondary world fantasy to establish that she has in fact not included romance and sex, sometimes at all, in her story for substantial numbers of fans to be willing to take a look at it as a fantasy series. (Male writers may do whatever they want in their stories.)
Consequently, whenever a female contemporary fantasy author comes up, or sometimes just a female fantasy author in general, the question is almost always raised by at least one member -- is the book a paranormal romance novel? They are not asking this question because they want to read paranormal romance, but because they want to avoid any story focused on the development of a romance. While I cannot always determine the amount of romantic and sexual content of a particular contemporary or other fantasy title I have not read to match the particular minimum required romance and sex avoidance levels of the person asking, I can tell that person if it's a straight-up paranormal romance, which will spend the bulk of the story about the development of a romance, or if it is a contemporary fantasy story, which will not do this, even though it is written by a female.
An easy way to initially tell, though, for those who care, is if the series switches protagonists per book and is focused on a new couple each book. This does not mean that Kelley Armstrong is writing paranormal romance, just because she has written books about a group of different protagonists, anymore than it does when Jim Butcher switches from Harry Dresden. Armstrong is writing thrillers, and the romance level varies depending on what the main thriller story is. It does mean, though, that if you really want to avoid paranormal romance novels, the back cover blurbs can give you a pretty good clue (far more than the cover art.)
Because this question gets regularly asked whenever female writers are discussed, I made an offer. And we can talk about any title you like any way you like. Rob and I had a long discussion about whether Mercy Thompson was way more romantic than Harry Dresden or they were simply both mystery-thrillers about critical figures solving threats and trying to figure out their love lives as part of the plots. Neither of us convinced the other, but it was fun. I figured that it was better to try and do that sort of conversation here in one thread, rather than have there be a grilling about whether a female writer is doing paranormal romance in lots of threads like the Go To Hell thread. Because it then tends to derail things. And this way, people can also find out about possible paranormal romances they might like to read and possible contemporary or other fantasy novels they might like to read. They're all fantasy. They all are stuff I like. And they all can be sold to as many people as possible. But it's an issue for some people and for others, it is very confusing.
Elemental Assassin Series by Jennifer Estep is that PRN?
Wow now i feel i bit silly my little is this PNR in the middle of the huge intellectual debate.
Last edited by Alucard Hellsin; August 27th, 2012 at 08:38 PM.
www.paranormalromance.org is the home of the now defunct PEARL awards (last awarded 2009). Their official definition for PNR is rather restrictive, much like Kat's definition -- specifically:
-----
" *Note: For the purposes of this award, eligible titles for each paranormal category must contain romance, with the focus on a central love story, involving the development of an emotionally committed relationship between two major characters, and a positive outcome.
Paranormal Romance:
Plots must focus on the development of an exclusive romance between two main characters which must be positively resolved (HEA) by the end of the story. Secondary plots may continue within a series however couples can only recur in subsequent novels as secondary characters."
-----
However, their own actual awards don't always reflect their official definition.
some of the 2009 awards:
Best Anthology -- Must Love Hellhounds (including short stories by Iona Andrews, Charlaine Harris, Meljean Brook, and Nalini Singh)
-- Honorable Mention to Strange Brew (including stories by Charlaine Harris, Jim Butcher, Patricia Briggs, Karen Chance, PN Elrod, Rachael Caine)
-- Honorable Mention to Belong to the Night (including stories by Cynthia Eden, Sherrill Quinn, Shelly Laurenston)
Best Urban Fantasy -- Bone Crossed by Patricia Briggs
-- Honorable Mention to Turn Coat by Jim Butcher
-- Frostbitten by Kelley Armstrong
-- Destined for an Early Grave by Jeaniene Frost
Overall Best Paranormal Romance -- Lover Avenged by JR Ward
-- Honorable Mention to Dead and Gone by Charlaine Harris
-- Honorable Mention to Blaze of Memory by Nalini Singh
or from 2007 (no awards were made in 2008)
Overall Best Paranormal Romance -- Devil May Cry by Sherrilyn Kenyon
-- Honorable Mention to For a Few Demons More by Kim Harrison
Like many things, I think the term "PNR" as understood by the general populace has expanded over the years -- well beyond its initial boundaries. As wikipedia now defines the term:
-----
"Paranormal romance is a sub-genre of the romance novel. A type of speculative fiction, paranormal romance focuses on romance and includes elements beyond the range of scientific explanation, blending together themes from the genres of traditional fantasy, science fiction, or horror. Paranormal romance may range from traditional category romances, such as those published by Harlequin Mills & Boon, with a paranormal setting to stories where the main emphasis is on a science fiction or fantasy based plot with a romantic subplot included. Common hallmarks are romantic relationships between humans and vampires, shapeshifters, ghosts, and other entities of a fantastic or otherworldly nature."
-----
eta -- woops, Kat, I was writing while you were posting. I'll check out your post and get back to ya!
edited again to add -- after reading your post, I don't really have much to add. It sounds a bit like you're upset about the disparate perceptions of male vs female authors, more than what the definition of PNR really is.
Last edited by Contrarius; August 27th, 2012 at 08:43 PM.
Sorry, I cross-posted with this one. As I said above, the Betsy series, which is I believe Davidson's most successful so far, is comic fantasy. For instance, the plot of one novel in the series:Originally Posted by Mister
Not terribly romantic, as you can see. But Davidson has done a lot of stuff with Berkley, in and out of their romance lines. So something like Davidson's thriller romance (not a fantasy novel) Thief of Hearts is a romance about a male doctor and a woman involved with the mob. And Davidson spun off a different series from her Betsy universe -- the werewolf series -- that is a paranormal romance series. So it's all pretty much the same for romance fans, but Davidson has been a major figure for the comic fantasy sub-field. Most of the folk who ask if a title is paranormal romance won't be interested in any of Davidson's work probably.Davidson's third Queen of the Vampires novel continues in the same vein as Undead and Unwed (2004) and Undead and Unemployed (2004). Betsy, still obsessed with shoes, discovers that Ant, her wicked stepmother, was possessed by the devil back in 1986 when she gave birth to Betsy's half-sister, Laura. This means that Laura, adopted by a minister, is actually the Spawn of Satan. And that's not all: the creepy Book of the Dead prophesies that the Spawn of Satan and the Queen of Vampires will rule the world. How is Betsy going to tell the warmhearted, churchgoing, innocent Laura that her birth mother was the devil, and that Laura may be on the path to world domination?
If you want to get into chick lit, that's a whole complicated market history thing from back to the 1980's. But short version: chick lit are "women's fiction" stories (stories about women protagonists,) that are comic. They may be romances and often are, but they don't have to be. Most comic stories, male or female, have a strong romantic sub-plot or sometimes main plot. The amount and type of comedy in comic fiction varies, but is often broad. Hence the pink and cartoon drawings on a lot of the "chick-lit" covers. Chick lit books are usually cross-marketed to romance media venues even if they aren't really about a romance. Comic fantasies are usually cross-marketed with general fiction as well or published in general fiction and cross-marketed to the fantasy category market, such as Christopher Moore. The first time I saw a Davidson book, it was actually a fantasy novel being sold in general fiction.
I have not read any of the Betsy books, but if you want high farce, I did read "Sleeping with the Fishes," the start of another series, and it was silly in clever ways. There are sex scenes in it -- farce sex scenes which are fun -- so be warned if that sort of material bothers you.
Davidson's Undead and Unwed actually won the PEARL award in 2004 for overall favorite Paranormal Romance Novel. (criteria: "Any single title paranormal romance first released in the award year.")
(btw in the same year, Kim Harrison was declared best new PNR author.)
Last edited by Contrarius; August 27th, 2012 at 09:27 PM.
I keep cross-posting here.
That's a bit tight -- you don't actually have to have the romance resolve happily for a romance novel, though it is usually required for a category romance line -- but you'll notice that it says essentially what I was saying. That's what the market category -- and that's what paranormal romance is, a market sub-category -- encapsulates.
That doesn't mean that romance publishers are going to be picky about marketing, especially when many romance publishers, like various Berkley lines, are part of large publishers that also have fantasy and SF lines. Cross marketing gets all the books sold and as I explained, romance fans are really not picky as long as there is some romance in there somewhere. A book often does not have to have a female protagonist, for instance. But paranormal romance is a type of story -- that's all it means -- a story about a romance. Most paranormal romances are put out by the romance category lines, but some are put out in general fiction or by SFFH publishers.
I am occasionally exasperated by it, but mostly I'm amused. Again, romance readers usually don't care, but for some fantasy readers -- certainly not all -- this is a very real preference and they want to avoid paranormal romances as not their thing. It doesn't come up with male authors. Like I said, I've never seen anyone ask this question about a male author (although there are of course quite a few male authors who write both straight and gay romance novels.) If someone wants to ask about a male author, though, it's not like I have a problem with it. This is not my issue. I read everything. I like romance peachy. I read every kind of fantasy. But the question keeps coming up in the forums here with regards to female authors' books. So we might as well talk about it for those who want to do so. Nobody's on trial here, and I'm pretty sure most female fantasy authors are pretty happy with romance readers liking their books, even if they are writing splatterpunk horror.It sounds a bit like you're upset about the disparate perceptions of male vs female authors, more than what the definition of PNR really is.
No, it's not paranormal romance. I've read By a Thread in that series -- I usually prefer to start with the first book in a series if I can but I was stuck in an airport and I'd been wanting to try the series. I thought some of the conflict scenes were a bit repetitive, but she's got a good, noir style. The books are pretty much classic Spillane wisecrack thrillers. The elemental magic in the series is really interesting. The main character, an assassin, does have romantic relationships, including serious ones, with some guys in the course of the series and there was, I want to say two but it might have only been one, sex scene in the book I read, so there's some. But mostly, the books are about various people trying to kill the main character and her complicated relationship with her family and foster family. There is some humor in the series, but it's not a heavy humor sort of series, less than Butcher if that's a guide. The series has built up a big fan base and is a NYTimes bestseller.
Estep does have a paranormal romance series, though, for Berkley, called the Bigtime series, that involves superheroes and villains. She also has a YA contemporary fantasy series. She is cross-marketed with romance, since she has multiple groups of fans and is in multiple markets. Although having that happen doesn't require you to have written paranormal romance. Most of the female contemporary fantasy female writers get cross-marketed to romance and some of the men.
We keep crossing the streams! I've read Kim Harrison and it is also not a paranormal romance series. It is a really good thriller series, though and the vampires and pixies in it are really interesting. Harrison essentially takes the Western and moves it to modern, alternate history Cincinnati. Ms. Morgan does have a healthy sex drive, but there's not a ton of sex in the books mostly, if people have that issue. I'd say it's even more action-filled than the Estep books. There's a fair amount of humor, but Morgan's character, while wisecracking, is played as sort of a tragic figure.
As you noted, C, the romance field has a definition for paranormal romance but doesn't hold to it when it comes to awards. This isn't unusual. The Nebula award was supposed to be for science fiction stories, but they awarded stuff to fantasy novels and eventually just changed the wording. Numerous fantasy fans will tell you that this or that science fiction novel is actually fantasy, because hey, Pern has dragons, etc. Again, what is or isn't paranormal romance is not an issue for romance readers, so why would it be an issue for their awards? The people asking the question usually don't want to read paranormal romance. But they may be willing to read Kim Harrison who is not writing romance novels in her series. You can get mad at them if you like, but I'm not really clear why this is so important to you.
If you look in our Supernatural/Contemporary/Urban Fantasy thread, which is a great thread btw, you'll see that the single most asked question in it is whether a female written title is paranormal romance (or romance before paranormal romance became the official title.) And that they are asking because they want to avoid those. So what would you prefer us all to do with these questions? Say, why yes, everything written by women are romance novels, as you can see by these romance awards, so stay very far away from them? Do you think that if I say they aren't romance series that I am driving romance readers away from these series? (I'm actually sincerely asking this question.)
If you want to talk about Harrison or anyone else and what romance elements are in them that you like, please go ahead. Just because a series isn't a romance series doesn't mean that it can't be interesting in romantic content.
Kat, the folks who created the PEARL awards think the Betsy books are PNR and that Harrison writes PNR. I'm sorry that you don't agree with them, but I don't see why anyone should consider you to be the ultimate authority on the matter.
I think it's much more realistic to tell such people how important or how unimportant romance is to the overall plot and characterization of the book they're asking about, rather than trying to apply a misleading yes/no test to the book.If you look in our Supernatural/Contemporary/Urban Fantasy thread, which is a great thread btw, you'll see that the single most asked question in it is whether a female written title is paranormal romance (or romance before paranormal romance became the official title.) And that they are asking because they want to avoid those. So what would you prefer us all to do with these questions?
eta --I'd like to see your documentation here. I wouldn't be surprised if the award intent changed at about the same time that the SFWA changed from "Science Fiction Writers" to "Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers". That's an entirely different situation than the PEARL awards, so it has no relevance here.The Nebula award was supposed to be for science fiction stories, but they awarded stuff to fantasy novels and eventually just changed the wording.
Hey, incidentally -- in 2000, the second year the PEARLs were ever awarded, Obsidian Butterfly by Laurell Hamilton (one of the Anita Blake books) got an honorable mention in the best overall PNR category. This isn't an issue of change over time.
Last edited by Contrarius; August 27th, 2012 at 10:22 PM.
I never said I was, although it's really a matter of types not authority analysis, but I think you're trying to label books very tightly here. Do you think that Harrison's books are romance novels or just have romantic sub-plots?
Well that will work on books I've read, like Estep and Harrison. I just did talk about how much romantic content is in those series. I can even go into some of the plots of individual titles since I know the characters. But I can't do that with books and series I have not read. It is my hope that others who have read books I have not will talk about the exact nature and amount of romance content in those books. Which you haven't done yet.I think it's much more realistic to tell such people how important or how unimportant romance is to the overall plot and characterization of the book they're asking about, rather than trying to apply a misleading yes/no test to the book.
What I can do, though, with books I haven't read, is tell you if it's a romance novel or a thriller/mystery/war novel/series or not. Because that doesn't require checking every sex scene, just knowing the plots of the books and the basic structure, which are freely available. Because those types are simply types, not a test. And the first thing people asking the question want to know is if it's a romance novel or not. After that, they want to know just how much sexual and romantic content may be in it even if it's a mystery/thriller/war novel. And that second part I can't necessarily give an estimate on if I haven't read it. But the first one, I can give a view on.
Well no, it was more a matter of the fact that fantasy titles were published as science fiction because it was the science fiction category market. (Not that you have to be published in the category market to win a Nebula.) It started out SF, but because they didn't really worry about the distinctions, fantasy works also came up in the award pretty early on. The name change in SFWA came rather late in the game (and the anacronym was briefly changed then dropped because SFWA seemed sufficient,) because it was seen as only fair to fantasy authors and because the fantasy category market by that time was fairly well established on its own (late 80's ish). SFF has always been together and a lot of authors write both -- which is the point. A lot of authors write romance, paranormal romance and contemporary fantasy. So what they are called is not rigid between markets. But the books are different types of stories.I'd like to see your documentation here. I wouldn't be surprised if the award intent changed at about the same time that the SFWA changed from "Science Fiction Writers" to "Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers". That's an entirely different situation than the PEARL awards, so it has no relevance here.
Yes, she did because she was the biggest name in contemporary fantasy at the time.Hey, incidentally -- in 2000, the second year the PEARLs were ever awarded, Obsidian Butterfly by Laurell Hamilton (one of the Anita Blake books) got an honorable mention in the best overall PNR category. This isn't an issue of change over time.
I'm not trying to label books at all, myself. I'm just trying to show you some of the problems with trying to label something as PNR, and with you trying to apply one definition when the rest of the world uses a much broader definition.
That's right, I haven't. I'm not trying to talk about my personal opinions of any individual books. I'm trying to address the issue of the PNR label.Which you haven't done yet.
I think people don't always realize what they're really asking for. Saying something is a "romance" or a "paranormal romance" doesn't really tell you about the sex content, or the literary merit, or the paranormal content of the book. When people say "is this a paranormal romance novel"? I think what they're really asking is "does this book have a lot of romantic or sexual content?" and "does this book have worthwhile fantasy elements apart from romantic content?". Since different people have different understandings of what is or is not PNR -- and since PNR may or may not actually have much sex or overbearing romance, and may or may not have much literary merit or worthwhile fantasy elements -- I think it's much more useful to address the underlying qualities of the book rather than the nebulous and poorly understood label.What I can do, though, with books I haven't read, is tell you if it's a romance novel or a thriller/mystery/war novel/series or not. ....Because those types are simply types, not a test. And the first thing people asking the question want to know is if it's a romance novel or not. After that, they want to know just how much sexual and romantic content may be in it even if it's a mystery/thriller/war novel.
Well, now you're kinda getting back to my original comment, that definitions change over time. In the case of the SFWA, the understanding of "science fiction" changed over time.Well no, it was more a matter of the fact that fantasy titles were published as science fiction because it was the science fiction category market.
(eta -- according to SFWA's own web site, "science fiction" was originally understood to encompass both SF and F. As they say: "At that time, the distinction between science fiction and fantasy was less important and SFWA’s name was accepted as encompassing both.")
In the case of PNR, no matter how restrictive the "official" or "accepted" definition for PNR may have been originally, the term is now understood in a much broader and more nebulous way.
Read those criteria again. As I quoted earlier, they give the "best paranormal romance novel" award to "Any single title paranormal romance first released in the award year". Undead and Unwed won that category. QED, they consider Undead and Unwed to be paranormal romance.Yes, she did because she was the biggest name in contemporary fantasy at the time.
eta --Okay, let's look at the RITAs. For instance, the 2012 RITA award for best debut novel was awarded to First Grave on the Right by Darynda Jones. As it happens, this book is the first in a series about a character named Charley Davidson. This series has the same protagonist in every book and has no HEA at the end of every book -- and so, by your own definition, it isn't even a romance novel. Yet the RITA folks gave it one of their romance awards anyway.....A better guide might be the RITA awards.
Last edited by Contrarius; August 27th, 2012 at 11:55 PM.
I do think it would be helpful, as Contrarius suggests, to have some form of algorithm that would help people gauge whether a book fits their interests. For now I'll accept KatG's definition, even though it looks like no books on the Teen Paranormal Romance shelves at B&N fit it.
Often readers of UF, often but not always male readers, dislike seeing a large focus on romance. And they label these "paranormal romance," when I think they'd be better off just saying "too much romance for my tastes."
For me, personally, I have no objection to the quantity of romance, but often I object to the quality of it. Not to trash a series by name, but there's a novel out there where the plot is, basically, "every demon in the universe wants to impregnate the protagonist." So 98% of the demons are trying to rape her nonstop, and the others are trying to woo her. And there are many series where the protagonist meets the hunky guy and they have this instant rapport and attraction and trust between them, and he's hopelessly devoted to her, and nothing shall ever change that; it strikes me as intimacy porn, and it feels soulless to me as a reader.
But Chess Putnam, in Stacia Kane's Downside Ghosts series, has a love story that's sometimes too painful for me to read, but it all makes sense -- the levels of intimacy and desire feel earned, no insta-rapport, no rape fixations. And the romantic elements develop inside the plotline, not alternating with it. I don't think even jaded male readers would say "too much romance" (though I sometimes say, "too much pain").
ROUND 2! -- Karen Armstrong, Women of the Otherworld. I've usually seen it considered UF, but this is a romance-heavy series where many of the books have their own separate protagonists pairing off in romantic couples.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks