QotW #104 Romantasy > Likes and Comments

Recently there's been buzz about a newly defined genre that's been dubbed "romantasy". These are fantasy books where the primary focus is a romantic plot, that just happens to take place in a fantasy setting. Have you read any romantasy books? What do you think of the genre?

Here's an article that Goodreads recently published about it!

The Imaginary Worlds podcast recently did an episode about Romantasy as well.

Romance isn't really my thing so I've not paid much attention to it.

It's not really my thing either, although thinking back, some more romance-focused fantasies that I've enjoyed are The Queen's Necklace by Teresa Edgerton, and all of Jacqueline Carey's Kushiel books. But I'd still call those fantasy with a romantic bent rather than books where the romance IS the plot. Same with some urban fantasy series like the October Daye or Kate Daniels books.

I've heard good things about Sarah J. Maas's works but they don't really appeal to me so I haven't picked them up.

I'd be interested if I see something well-written. I'm always looking to try something new.

The closest thing I can think of time-travel romance, in which a modern girl gets a chance to be courted by a duke or a highlander. There was one of those I liked, um, a couple of decades ago? Wish I could remember the title. (research - it was by Jude Deveraux, it might have been Remembrance... I'd have to reread to see if it holds up.)

Reading some of the comments on the article, and the reviews of some of the books that look interesting from the lists, I'm disappointed. It looks like things like issues of consent, insta-love, gratuitous spice, and people with good heads on their shoulders are still problems. I like an intelligent romance once in awhile but these don't seem to be on track for that.

I have a bunch of Sarah J. Maas’s books in my Kindle app (acquired through various sales) & I plan to start them later this year, mostly to fill a prompt in a reading challenge I’m doing (a book by an author “everyone” has read except you). I figure they will be a change of pace and I will intersperse them with lots of other things.

Outlander by Diana Gabaldon was sort of historical fiction/time travel/romance/fantasy, with the romance being a major part of the plot. And, although I never read them, I would think the Twilight series by Stephenie Meyer fits the “romantasy” label.

Sharon Shinn and Catherine Asaro come to mind.

I prefer my romance books to be in the real world myself. So I haven't looked into fantasy versions of it. Though I imagine if I found something that worked for me, I'd go for it.

I read Outlander a bunch of years ago and liked it well enough, but not enough to continue with the series.

Dawn wrote: "Sharon Shinn and Catherine Asaro come to mind.

I prefer my romance books to be in the real world myself. So I haven't looked into fantasy versions of it. Though I im..."

I have to confess, I've written almost no fantasy. Decades ago some of my science fiction crossed-over to romance because the relationship subplots appealed to readers who liked romance but were also looking for sf. Now that so many other authors are writing books that appeal to both audiences, mine no longer have the same cross-over power they did back then.

Romantic fantasy has been around for decades, even longer. I suspect calling it Romantasy is a marketing ploy. Romantic fantasy is a different genre than romantic science fiction, though. Some decades ago, I had a few books that might be called romantic fantasy, but they've been out of print for years.

Nowadays, cross-over from sf to romance isn't uncommon. When my first books came out in the 1990s, though, they broke all the marketing rules. For my first one, the initial reviews didn't mention romance. The controversy revolved around the fact that Primary Inversion was promoted as literary sf when it was adventure-based sf. It got some good buzz, I was getting wonderful input from sf readers--

And then I started hearing from romance readers.

Absolutely no one expected that cross-over, especially for a book with a title like Primary Inversion. My publisher considered it hard sf, and I had a paper published in the American Journal of Physics about the science in it, yet it had some of the greatest cross-over of my books. The other one with a large cross-over was The Quantum Rose, which won the Nebula. I think that one had a larger cross-over because the first half was a retelling of Beauty and the Beast in an sf context.

I hadn't know the romance genre existed. When I told my publisher what was happening, they had no idea what to think. They advised me that if people heard the word "romance" associated with a female hard sf author, they wouldn't take my work seriously. I had to make a tough decision: embrace this unexpected audience or go the route recommended to female sf writers back then, which was to speak to an audience marketing predicted was primarily male and tech/science-oriented. And it's true, to this day my audience skews slightly more toward men than women. My publisher pointed to Ursula Le Guin, whose work also had a cross-over to romance, and suggested I approach my own books in a similar manner.

I thought about it well and hard. They had a point. I understood the path they envisioned for me. And yet--I was getting wonderful feedback from romance readers. It wasn't only romance; I had male hard sf readers writing to ask about what happened to the relationships of characters and female romance readers asking for details about the science and tech. It upended every "truism" of marketing on both sides of the fence. To ignore that so I'd be more acceptable in sf bothered me. I finally decided I didn't want to constrain my writing or outreach. I figured the negative views associated with the word romance would never change unless authors respected in other fields were willing to talk about it. So I embraced the cross-over.

As a result, I met amazing people in the romance genre, relationships I value much in the way I treasure my sf relationships (like being a part of this wonderful group :-)). When I lived in Maryland, Mary Jo Putney became a dear writing friend. I valued the time I shared speaking honors at a conference with Diana Gabaldon much as I've loved the Guest of Honor appearances I've been fortunate enough to have at sf cons. I got to know Lois Bujold, who had a large cross-over from sf to romance well before I came on the scene. The lifetime award I received from a writing group for raising literary awareness in women's fiction meant the world to me.

Did it backfire in the way my publisher at Tor feared? Yes and no.

At first, it backfired greatly when I talked about the cross-over at sf cons. Some readers dismissed my work without reading it. The tone of some (but not all) commentary changed, becoming dismissive for the same books. Romance critics were also annoyed, saying it wasn't romance, it was sf. To this day, my publishers thinks critics would have treated my work differently if I had never used the word romance, but instead promoted it as sf written by a Harvard phd in science. Were they disappointed with me for making a choice that went against all wisdom in the field? They hesitated at first--

Until they saw my sales.

My first royalty check was huge. That's when Tor said, "Talk about cross-over all you want." They tried to market to both audiences. It didn't work so well; it took a type of marketing that, though better known today, didn't exist at the time. Nowadays many people write cross-over, not only because it sells well, but because publishers have figured out how to market it. What I currently write can't actually be called romantic sf. I still get readers who enjoy both genres, but I'm not almost the only one doing it anymore, and the people who do it front and center are the ones with the greatest cross-over.

What has always intrigued me is that one of the most romantic books I've written -- The Quantum Rose -- is the one that won the Nebula. Some critics found that win controversial. Hell, I didn't expect it, either. I thought George R.R Martin or Connie Willis would take the honors, and in my opinion any of the nominees that year were Nebula worthy. It was one of the greatest honors of my writing life, one that I've always treasured.

Catherine wrote: "I had male hard sf readers writing to ask about what happened to the relationships of characters"

My massively unromantic husband (he proposed to me over the phone) is one of those guys, In fact he's the one that fervently hounded me until I read Primary Inversion (back when there were only 3 books).

Now even unromantic I (who happily accepted that phone proposal and saw no problem with it) eagerly await new books. :)

Random wrote: "Catherine wrote: "I had male hard sf readers writing to ask about what happened to the relationships of characters"

My massively unromantic husband (he proposed to me over the phone) is one of tho..."

Thank you! What a lovely comment. It made my previously tough day much better.

I guess I was not restricting myself to the question at hand and branched out into SF. :)

I know well that you only write SF, I have been reading your books for years. I originally picked them up for the SF but I really like the romantic parts of the stories. I am a serious sucker for a kick-ass female lead and you write good ones.

Dawn, that means so much to know. Thank you!

When I was a kid, I never thought of sf and fantasy as different genres. They were all full of wonder. :-)

Dawn wrote: "I am a serious sucker for a kick-ass female lead and you write good ones"

Soz is my husband's favorite character. Followed, I suspect, by (view spoiler)[Tarquine (hide spoiler)]. Spoiler tag in place because this character doesn't show up until later books.

But back to the subject, while not Fantasy, the Skolian Empire series is a big exception in my "I don't like romance" stance. I think its because the story is about more than the romance, that happily ever afters aren't necessarily the focus, and there's some really good SF in there. I guess it feels like the romance is shaped by the characters and story more than the characters and story being shaped by the romance. Hopefully that makes sense to more than just me. :)

I think that I get it, Random. Most people fall in love, have crushes, etc., as a normal part of their make-up. So, while they're having adventures, saving the empire, coming of age, or engineering marvels, romance happens. But most people do indeed think of themselves as adventurers or engineers or creators first, and don't focus on romance so much.

And that's the basis upon which I choose my fiction. The 'calling' comes first, and romance is a sweet cherry on top.

Random wrote: "Soz is my husband's favorite character. Followed, I suspect, by [spoilers removed]. Spoiler tag in place beca..."

I'm pretty partial to Major Bhaajan. She's been a good addition to the Asaro characters. :)

I just remembered a fantasy romance I read 8 years ago, Ritual of Proof by Dara Joy. This one I would actually say is a romance book with fantasy elements, so would meet the definition more accurately.

Ursula's LeGuin's Forgiveness Day is a great science fiction romance. Also Lois Bujold's first book, which I'm drawing a blank on the title.

Decades ago there was an award winner, I think of the Nebula but maybe the Hugo, that consisted of three stories following a woman born hearing in a society where everyone was deaf. It was a good science fiction romance. Does that ring any bells for anyone? I'd love to look it up, but I can't remember the title. It was written by a well known female science fiction writer.

Dawn wrote: I'm pretty partial to Major Bhaajan. She's been a good addition to ..."

Thanks. Sometimes she almost writes herself. I didn't actually plan her character; she came into being when I got commissioned to write a novella, which turned into The City of Cries.

Soz is my husband's favorite character. Followed, I suspect, by [spoilers removed]. Spoiler tag in place beca..."

The character in your spoiler is one of my favorites to write. I don't know where she came from. I was writing Ascendant Sun, and she just strode in and took over. As is her wont. :-)

Catherine wrote: "The character in your spoiler is one of my favorites to write. I don't know where she came from. I was writing Ascendant Sun, and she just strode in and took over. As is her wont. :-)."

She is certainly a character with depth. I am dying to find out how (view spoiler)[her relationship with Jai turns out. Or, for that matter, how things turn out between Jai and Kelric given everything else that is happening. Hey look! Can anyone guess my favorite two characters? :) (hide spoiler)]

Back to Romantasy, I had a thought this morning of another book I read recently. I don't think most people who are into romance would consider this romance. It does have an implied possibility of a HEA (happily every after). It has a few shelvings under Romance so I will toss it into the arena.

Nettle & Bone
I've never been one for romance even when I was younger, but I enjoyed watching a relationship forming between two more mature characters. It felt natural, not forced, no major consequences, no drama.

Like Cheryl said above, Marra had her calling, her goal. That was the priority. The rest was just bonus. but it was the things Marra noticed that stood out to me so much. Like they being forced to sleep together (physically sleep back to back, it was cold, there was 1 small blanket). She was ultra aware of him and of how much she moved, fidgeted, how much she might be bothering him. But later, when they no longer needed to share a blanket, she became ultra aware of his absence. Its surprising how difficult it can be to get to sleep by yourself when you are so used to someone else being there, even if you are not really interacting in any way.

I think HEAs annoy me because it implies that life goes into stasis once people get married or get into a stable relationship. Life is messy. There are stresses. There is pain. There is fear. The great thing about long term relationships is that you have someone beside you to share the stress, pain, and fear along with the joy. That you do not have to deal with that alone. And so much romance ignores all of that. yet I see it as one of the most important parts.

And besides, HEAs do not exist. They are nothing more than a fantastic lie. Nearly every relationship will end in grief one way or another. We are all mortal after all.

Catherine wrote: "three stories following a woman born hearing in a society where everyone was deaf. It was a good science fiction romance...."

Ooh, I'd love to check that out. The only thing that comes to mind is the StarBridge series by A.C. Crispin. This listopia has more:
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/3....

I loved Ann's Starbridge books. It wasn't that, though. I finally remembered. It's "Mother and Child" by Joan de Vinge. The Bujold book is Shards of Honor.

Random :-). I have to get back to them.

Fireship / Mother and Child for a link; I'll investigate, thank you!

How could I have forgotten about Bujold! There are quite a few love stories wrapped up in the Vorkosigan saga. I particularly enjoyed the latest, Gentleman Jole and the Red Queen.