And They Lived Horribly Ever After

A Guest Post by Coral Moore

You probably don’t know me. My name is Coral and I’m a speculative fiction writer. At first glance, my fantastical fiction and Anne Holly’s contemporary romance don’t seem to have much in common. You might even wonder what I’m doing here, on a very romance-y blog. The answer is pretty simple—I love romantic storylines. I do have a couple of problems with the way romance is expected to be these days, though. I don’t subscribe to the theory that a story has to fit into a mold to be fulfilling, which is why I’ve hesitated to label my books that way. After a few late-night conversations with Anne regarding the formulaic nature of much of today’s commercial fiction, I know it’s a matter she has some interest in as well, so I decided to write a little something about romances that don’t follow the “type” and why they are still worthwhile.

I’m going to back way up for a moment and start with a classic, just to offer a bit of foundation for my claim. Romeo and Juliet is not a romance by today’s standards. Though the plot is driven by the central relationship, there is no happy ending. I would argue that since the budding relationship reaches a logical conclusion—even though the resolution is a tragic one—the story should still be considered a romance. The play is entirely about their love and how it shapes the world around them. It’s a love story, in the purest sense, yet it would never be labeled a romance now.

Why is the romance genre the only one so handicapped by the reliance on happy endings? If a science fiction story has a tragic ending, no one suggests that it belongs in a different genre. No one would have told Bradbury, “We only allow happy endings on alien planets here, move along now,” and thank goodness because the darkness of his stories is part of what makes them so good. Don’t get me wrong, I love a happy ending. I just don’t think it should be required for the genre because knowing how the story is going to end diffuses some of the tension for me. The most poignant love stories teeter at the edge of loss, and without the chance that things won’t work out, that potential for tragedy is gone.

My favorite stories are the darkest ones. I’ve always preferred them, probably because so much of my early reading was horror. If I can’t believe something terrible might happen as a result of the conflict, there isn’t much point to reading the story in my opinion. Let’s use Harry Potter as an example (Spoiler Alert: Though I can’t imagine there’s anyone who doesn’t know the basic plot of the stories out there). Until more than halfway through the series there really isn’t much fear about the consequences. Though the situation is purported to be dire, there’s no immediate sense that something awful could happen. Our heroes will just keep beating the bad guys, skipping along merrily at the end. Cedric’s death changes everything. Once we know that someone important could die as a result of what’s going on, the tone of the stories turns more urgent.

Though my stories are heavily romantic, I don’t like to label them as romances because I want there to be doubt and darkness at the base of them. When my heroine walks away from the hero, I want you to believe she might not come back. When the hero tells the heroine that she should leave or something awful might happen, I want you to believe the terrible is possible. That just can’t happen while writing under the strictures of modern-day romance, so what’s an author to do?

My newest release is Elements of Rebellion. I’ve waffled back and forth on how to label this story, basically since I finished writing it. I settled on Dark Fantasy Romance, but I’m still not sure if that’s truly where it belongs. Part of me still clings to the idea that the tension is somehow less if the reader goes into it knowing there is a happy ending.I’m sure there are dissenting opinions on this subject, and I welcome your attempts to convince me that every romance should end happily in the comments. If you’d like to have a more prolonged discussion, I invite you to come find me on Twitter, Goodreads or my blog. I might even give you a copy of my not-romance for your trouble.

~*~

Elements of Rebellion

Coral Moore

After spending most of her life an unwilling captive in a brothel, Sindari is sold to Lord Devin, a man with a reputation for unspeakable cruelty. In the arms of this man who must pretend he cares nothing for her, Sindari finds compassion, making the journey through her barren homeland all the more perilous. Along the way she discovers she can channel elemental forces that compliment Devin’s ability to manipulate fire.

Harnessing this power, she battles the Dominion, an unrelenting foe that has broken the spirit of the Eldari people through twenty years of savagery. Trapped by the brutal empire that has enslaved millions, Sindari and Devin fight against hopeless odds.

Genre: Fantasy
Length: 85,000
Warnings: Graphic Violence and Sexual Situations
Written for NaNoWriMo 2010.

HEA Forever?

Ah, the HEA - "happily ever after." According to the Romance Writers of America, this is a cornerstone of romance. They define a romance novel by its:

"...emotionally satisfying and optimistic ending."

When most people, including myself, refer to "romance novel," this is part of the idea. No matter what happens, you know there will be an HEA at the end. There's a certain R&R aspect to knowing how a book will end, and that it will end happily. This is part of why romances are such a good pastime for busy people. One can settle into it like a warm bath, and embrace the familiarity of it all.

But where, then, do we place non-HEA romance? Is there such a thing? I believe there is. I've read a number of books that I consider romances, yet which don't end happily. Romeo and Juliet, anyone? How many lovers has Nicholas Sparks killed off? Yes, I believe they exist. I know they do. Granted, people who want HEA might not like these romances as much, but I don't think that negates them as romances; they're just a different sort. In film studies, they are often called "melodramas," to distinguish them from "romantic comedies." "Romantic lit," maybe, instead of "genre romance", for our purposes?

Needless to say, I have nothing against HEA, and certainly nothing against traditional romance novels, as anyone who's familiar with this blog knows. Heck, all my books so far have been HEA or at least Happy For Now. (Oh no! Did I just **SPOILER** my entire opus there?)

However, I'm now working on a few projects where I don't know if they will end happily, especially in terms of any relationships therein. I can't guarantee the required HEA with those books, so I've already come to terms with the fact that I will be publishing them as non-romances, even though some of them have romantic aspects or even love stories. Romantic elements, yes. But the HEAs are iffy at best, if HEA allows only for coupling, and not for character development and triumph over adversity. (I.e., if "getting your man" is the only form of happy ending, it's not likely going to happen here.)

Will readers feel ripped off if they perceive me as a "romance writer," and I don't deliver? This is a worry I have, but I'm moving past it. I've decided not to split myself off into a new pen name for these books. I might shift/update some of my "image", but I will be keeping this name for these works. They will still be My Books, and they feel as much a part of me as my romances. I'm disinclined to exile them. Nor can I just shelve everything non-romance, because that wouldn't be satisfying for me.

It's time to test run the whole "brand the writer, not the books" theory of author marketing, I guess. I believe readers are savvy enough to handle this, and I'm okay if my "romance purity" cred slips because of these expansions.

This month, however, my distance from "romance" seems to have grown, somewhat against my will.

The HEA issue has been brought to the forefront in recent weeks due to some new rulings by RWA. As far as I know, RWA has long held that the HEA is definitive of romance as a genre. However, it did have an awards category for works containing a "strong romantic element," which basically means they aren't "traditional romances," but do have enough romance in them to be applicable to their awards and their common readership. Recently, RWA announced that this category would be gone as of 2014. Then, according to reports, they took the further move to clarify that those writers who do not write what they consider to be "real romance" (including HEA) are only eligible for associate membership, at most, leaving them either paying for membership without voting rights, or, well, leaving altogether.

In short, if you don't write romance-focused fiction, with a HEA romance between main characters as your "A Plot", you are not a romance writer, and are therefore ineligible. Oh well, it's their org, and their rules, so it's fair enough.

All it is means to me is that I guess I will never be a member of RWA now.

There have been several reasons why I've been reluctant to part with the money it takes to join RWA, so this is just the "case closed" seal. Other issues I've had included the absence of a convenient local chapter (one of the main things many RWA members love about membership), their stance on ebooks (though I gather that's changing) and non-advance paying publishers, and on erotica, and their often problematic views on LGTBQ fiction (I don't write LGTBQ fiction at present, but I stand with them on issues of equity). The likelihood I would ever attend their annual national shindig is basically nil, as well. It's always seemed to me that it's really an organization for traditional publishing, with agents and advances, and regular category romance through Big Publishers. There's nothing wrong with that, if that's what you want and where you are heading, but it's not me or my career, and I get plenty of contact with other writers through different means, particularly social media and forums. Why pay steadily increasing dues if I'm not sure it's right for me?

Honestly, I simply resist paying and joining groups unless I feel an affinity with them, and I've not felt affinity with RWA. Now the HEA thing just makes that possibility even more remote. I'm not heartbroken, though RWA was one of those benchmarks I held in mind when I first pictured myself as a romance writer. I've just come to face reality and change, that's all.

So, long story short - with my previous books, you will get an HEA (or HFN, "happily for now"), and I love that. With some of my future books, you might still get an HEA/HFN, when I return to romances. In the meantime, there will be some books that trip out of the genre, and might not be HEA or even HFN.

What was Marge Simpson's line? "It's an ending. That's enough."

And I'm okay with that. I hope you will be, too.

This is not "Goodbye to Romance." It's just a big Hello to other things, as well. But, I do believe it is goodbye to RWA, which I never really said hello to to begin with.