For those of you who keep up here I wanted to let you know that, dependent on how busy I am at work, I intend to write some analysis on Willa Cather's O Pioneers (1913) and Edith Wharton's Age of Innocence (1920). I might also share some thoughts on poetry by Ezra Pound and W.C. Williams, but there is probably other things I would rather post about.
Not the least of which is my newest story, To Turn on One's Own, which I have almost completed a draft of. It will be longer that my most recent tales, probably sitting in that sweet 2500-5000 word range that I seem to fall in. It is another pre- captain story, and hopefully it will be mighty satisfying to them as that read it.
And a quick or not-so-quick question for those of you up to answering it. I've made most of you aware of my intention to start working on the(or a) novel in January. Chronologically this first novel will fall somewhere between the stories Pluck This Jewel . . . and Resurrection. That may or may not mean anything to you, but that is what prompts the aforementioned question. When you read a book, how important is the romantic (romantic as in the lover relationship, as opposed to romantic taking liberties with reality, as in the British Romantic Period in Literature, which had little to do with being in love) element? I am assuming that you do not pick up books that would be considered romances (ie. Harlequin Romance novels) but you might, I suppose. Have you ever read a book where the relationship focus was on friendships rather than romance? If so, what was it and how did you feel about it? Did it rate with a similar book that had a romance element? I hope that you will consider my questions, because I would like to know what you think. If you are not comfortable leaving your answer as a comment feel welcome to e-mail me with it, but please comment and let me and the others know that that is what you are doing. I appreciate all of your support, I don't think I would be making the progress that I am without you.
R
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Master and Commander was really good, and had no romantic element. I like a romance, but it's not essential.
E.
That movie (master & commander) was too much for me...i think we made it through a 1/2 hour...but I did read the book Rings & Feathers in high school where the steady friend through all the unsteady romances ended up with the girl & I liked it a lot! Also there is your relationship story with E. that is awesome & real to boot! And the only reason you might deem romance necessary for your writing is the time era you usually use as romance ties in so nicely with knights & damsels in distress. But it works to not have a romance element too.
Okay, I know you posted this months ago, but for some reason I have only just acquired the ability to view these early posts of yours. Plus, I think this is an interesting topic.
There are numerous examples of excellent stories lacking romance. I loved Master and Commander. The Lord of the Rings is another great example. Although it does contain a few romances, they are practically side-notes, and Tolkien himself admitted he didn't even want to include them at all. He's been criticized for his lack of strong female characters, but that's not the same issue as the inclusion of romance. The series A Song of Ice and Fire includes several romances (which all end badly), but also includes a number of strong female characters with no romantic involvements.
Having said all that, I do enjoy a well written romance, in any kind of story. I have even been known to pick up a few select romance novels (hold the comments, I can explain!) by the excellent Georgette Heyer. A romantic storyline that manages to avoid cliches can really enrich just about any story. A long, epic novel should probably include romance of some kind, just by virtue of its scope and length. How epic can it be without love playing a role somewhere? But I don't think romance is a necessary part of any novel.
Post a Comment