The Tarts welcome a new mystery writer who has crossed over into our dark world from romance writing. Karen Kendall is the award-winning author of seventeen novels and novellas. Her upcoming mystery release is TAKE ME IF YOU CAN (Signet, April 2008) the first book in a series about an agency that recovers stolen art.

Can A Feminist Write Romance Novels?

By Karen Kendall

I may write romances, but I’m no Barbara Cartland. I don’t wear filmy negligees or boas. In fact, the only boa I’ve ever had was Columbian (my husband’s). It was seven feet long and featherless, but it did have fangs – and it had lurid fantasies about my cat.

The old clichés about romance no longer hold true. Fabio’s gone and I haven’t seen a rape fantasy plot in a long time. But . . .

Let’s be honest: romance tends to get universally mocked.

Why? For one thing, it’s accused of being formulaic. But it’s no more formulaic than spy/adventure thrillers (save the world, get the girl) or mysteries (who dunnit and why) and we don’t mock those. Of course, thrillers and mysteries don’t get the covers that romances do, and the covers are part of the problem.

A friend of mine once had her book featured by Jay Leno, who read passages from it on live television while he and the audience laughed. Ever seen Leno reading passages from Dale Brown or Clive Cussler and busting a gut laughing? No – because male fantasies are seen as legitimate in our society, while female fantasies are seen as ludicrous. Why?

My mother, a professor of comparative literature, liked to read romances (and mysteries) on the side, but she wouldn’t be caught dead near the university with them. Yet if the male dean of her department were seen walking down the street with a spy novel, nobody would think twice about it.

Does it boil down to the sex?

Throughout history, men have painted and written about women sexually and it’s been accepted. Women have been the object of the male eye—and still are. Just grab the latest Victoria’s Secret catalogue and take a look. But it’s hard to imagine a Victor’s Secret catalogue, isn’t it? There are no male models contorting themselves into impossible positions to show us the latest in, er, banana hammocks.

And yet the Victoria’s Secret catalogue is marketed towards women! Most of us get depressed just looking at it and not measuring up--but we don’t laugh. And there’s a reason for that. It’s a five-hundred dollar word: scopophilic phallocentrism.

Scopophilic Phallocentrism is what, exactly?

We live in a society in which images of women are controlled largely by men.

Women are usually the object of the camera, while the eye behind the camera is male.

We’re so inured to images like those in the Victoria’s Secret catalogue that we barely notice them anymore. They’ve become part of our culture and our expectations of women. In other words, the male eye behind the camera has become the eye of the mainstream.

The question is: how can we move the female eye behind the lens and put the male in the position of subject? How do we make sure that female perception and female fantasy gets equal time in the media?

By writing and directing from a female perspective. It’s that simple . . . or is it?

It’s part of what I do every day, putting my eye behind a mental camera and creating text images of a male hero from my vantage point as a woman. This means that he becomes my subject and that I have the choice to idealize him, stereotype him, mock him, expose him or treat him fairly as a human being.

But men don’t really like being subjects of the camera/writer, unless they can control the product. They don’t like being seen only in the context of what they can do for a woman. They don’t like being powerless. And so they are, quite naturally, going to scoff at women’s fantasies—namely, romance novels.

Just as we’d rather not compare ourselves physically with models, most men don’t want to be scrutinized next to body builders or romance heroes. What if they come up short? So they point and laugh at the guy on the novel’s cover and sneer that he’s only a stupid fantasy.

Duh! Of course he’s a fantasy. That’s the whole point.

The big question is, why have women not ridiculed the male fantasy of the perfect, airbrushed, bodacious babe? The one who looks like she could suck a golf ball through a garden hose each and every night? Too many women go running for lip-plumping products instead of laughing.

Since the male eye has become the norm – the mainstream – a lot of women scorn romance novels, too, without even trying them. Now, I’m ready to admit that there are some truly lousy romances out there (and lousy male adventure books, too) but there are also wonderful, funny, touching and well-written ones. My favorite fan e-mails come from women who tell me, "I’d never read a romance novel in my life before I picked up yours. I can’t believe what I’ve been missing all these years!"

So how can I, with a straight face, call myself a feminist and write romance novels?

Because I’m working every day to validate female fantasy and that’s important.

The bottom line is that a mass-market audience isn’t likely to read the French feminists. No, that audience is going to continue to absorb mainstream culture, so the battle to change perceptions begins there.

I write the most compelling fiction I can, featuring hot, macho heroes (hey, who wants to fantasize about a bald guy with a pot-belly?) who are well-matched with equally strong, intelligent heroines. They don’t shriek – they act. They engage in power struggles with the hero and often win. Along the way they have some great sex, and I happen to think that’s a good thing, since historically women – busy being the objects of male fantasy – have put up with a lot of bad sex, too.

Tried a romance novel lately?

***

For more information visit Karen Kendall's Website

For more information on scopophilia and related issues, see the following links:

The Patriarchal Gaze

Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema

Comments

[SusanB]

What a wonderful start to my day! Thanks, Karen :) I'll say it proudly: I am a feminist* and I like romance novels. Now I can even tell (the infamous) "them" why those two parts can coexist happily. And my drop-out-grad-school self loves the new fancy term "scopophilic phallocentrism", and the ah-ha moment after I got it.

*Feminist - what most women in the US are, I think and hope, but less than a third will label themselves as (per last statistic I saw). I am still in shock and mourning.

[Sheila Connolly]

Great post, Karen! It always puzzles me that romance makes up the largest single segment of the book market, in terms of sales, yet gets no respect from writers of any gender. You've made a convincing argument.

[Josh]

I love this sort of post. It is important for people to take control of the language. Certain elements of society learned that 30 or so years ago, and by being able to frame the debate have been able to own it. I could go on, but regular readers here know my biases.

[michele]

Great topic, Karen, and welcome!

I just finished "The Other Boleyn Girl" which I bought because -- I swear this is true -- it was the only non James Patterson or Clive Cussler title available in the hotel bookstore I was in. It was by far better written and more engaging than any male-protagonist spy novel or thriller that I've read in the last year. Yet it's condemned as a bodice ripper by the same people who read those stupid hardware books. And I don't mean just men; women are guilty of this too.

But let's be real. This is hardly news, and it's not going to change. Forget Victoria's Secret -- porn rules the world. Do you *know* how much more money you could make starting a porn website than writing novels?

[Nancy Martin]

I've written romances, and I've written mysteries. And a "thriller" back when they weren't popular. And historical fiction. In none of those genres did I find any respect. So maybe all pop fiction writers are touchy? Maybe if we're looking for respect, we should go teach women's studies somewhere--except that department probably feels looked down upon!

Good argument, though, Karen! Thanks for being our guest.

[Elaine Viets]

scopophilic phallocentrism
I love that phrase, and I'd use it in a song, except I can't sing.
Thanks for joining today's blog.

[Kathy Reschini Sweeney]

Hey - I love romance novels. I've read and enjoyed your books, Karen and I can verify that they do feature great heroines and hot heroes - the best kind of romance there is!

Can't wait to read your new one next month. Thanks for such a great blog.

Are you coming to RT in Pittsburgh this April?

[Laura (in PA)]

Thanks, Karen. One of my biggest pet peeves is the attitude of people toward romance novels as being beneath them. I'm an intelligent person and avid reader, who happens to enjoy romances and mysteries. I'm so sick of the disdain of people who say they only read the "important" novels (which in my opinion, is code for "depressing").

Of course, I'm also a country music lover (among other kinds), and people feel the same way about that. I guess in the eyes of the world, based on my taste in books and music, I'm an unintelligent, insipid redneck.

Good to see you visiting the blog, Karen.

[Harley]

Oh, my God, I'm printing out this blog! Karen, you have articulated (and given a $5000 name to) vague concepts I've wondered about ever since reading that French feminist who changed my whole life when I was 21.

I know that when I get to heaven, Simone de Beauvoir is going to greet me and say, "well? Did you do your bit re scopophilic phallocentrism?" and I will say, "yes, I wrote novels with pink on the covers." Thank you, Karen!

[Harley]

Oh, and Laura? Love country music.

And Karen? My mom was a college professor who also hid her regency romances and British mysteries in her bedroom, or the upstairs bookshelves (NOT the living room) the way other people hide their gin bottles.

[Rita Scott]

Welcome Karen! Good post.
But I dunno, I did crack up laughing when reading a Cussler book last week. Something about, if the bad guys get control, "oil could go up to $80 a barrel!" LOL don't we wish it would go back down to that!

[Laura (in PA)]

Glad to hear it, Harley! If we get to talk in Pittsburgh, we'll have to compare favorite country music hunks.

[Karen Kendall]

Thanks for all the great comments, everyone! I especially love the image of meeting Simone de Beauvoir in heaven, LOL.

As for 'pop genre' authors being touchy--yeah, probably. I wonder if Chaucer and Dante were touchy in their day?

And using scopophilic phallocentrism in song lyrics--well, I did just attempt a couple of rap verses but clearly I haven't had enough coffee yet . . .

[Karen Kendall]

Meant to say thanks for having me on the Lipstick Chronicles today! Karen

[Shannon]

I started reading romance novels because my friend's mother banned them from her house, so she kept her stash at mine. Since I was always looking for something to read, I just saw it as another source for my reading habit. I added mysteries to the mix later and now I probably read more mysteries than romance, but it's pretty close. I used to hide the fact I read romances, until I realized that I accepted what my friends read, why wouldn't they do the same for me?

It turns out people found it easier to accept that I read romances than it was for them to learn than I liked country music. I've been mocked more for that than I have been for my reading tastes.

[Becky Hutchison]

Great blog Karen, and thanks for so eloquently stating something I've thought about for a long time.

I started reading romance when I was in junior high, but it was categorized as historical fiction then. When the so-called "bodice-ripers" came along, I started reading those too. My college friends made fun of my romance books because they were into the philosophical writers. But I read those authors too. Maybe I was more eclectic?

I chose to read romance books because you could read them quickly without having to wonder what the message was and they had good endings. Right now I prefer the comtemporary romances (aka Chick Lit) because they are light-hearted, funny & have messages of friendship, love & self-worth. Call me a sap, but I don't like books or movies that are depressing and/or have sad endings. Like Lynn, I still wonder why so many of the "classics" are depressing. Does a book have to be sad to be good? Just saying.

So up with romance, fun & good-endings...and down with gloom, doom & despair...

And thanks to our guest blogger Karen for her inspiring words.

[mome]

Thanks Karen! I think folks try too hard to look intelligent rather than being intelligent - hence Romance being termed "trashy" or "beach" reads. To me it seems one of the main reasons for reading fiction is for pleasure and what is more pleasurable then a good fantasy? Hey anything that takes me away from my real life into a life where the "best stuff" is constantly going on and everyone is beautiful no matter what is serving a really good purpose. To be honest, as a former school librarian trying to coax unwilling middle schoolers to read, a book that is enjoyed and makes the reader want more is the most important book of all!

[ArkansasCyndi]

Late tuning in and nothing to add beyond what has been said. I love romance. I love the alpha male as long as he's in a FICTION romance and not in my home!

I know when I read, I read for fun...something to take me away.

Very interesting post, Karen

ps to the TLC gang...Karen was the first author to due a critique of my writing. Poor gal! LOL

[Mary Storyteller]

"The question is: how can we move the female eye behind the lens and put the male in the position of subject? . . . or treat him fairly as a human being."
My first impulse is to applaud the treating as a human being concept, but thinking of all the elevated heart rates in the aqua-aerobics class in reaction to the Adonis swimming laps in the next lane, I have to admit to a bit of objectification from time to time. You have inspired me to check out some good romance, so I've requested _The Night We Met_ and I'm ready to take the plunge! The librarians have me pegged as an "eclectic" reader, so this is right in character.
BTW, two or three years ago my entire Shakespeare class, males as well as females, declared themselves feminists a few years ago, after one of the young men read off the dictionary definition, confirming the definition I had just given them. (Portia, _Merchant of Venice_ in case the school board wants to know how that discussion fit into the curriculum).

[Katherine C.]

can't really add much here either, other than I love reading a good "trashy" romance novel just as much as an intense thriller, a mind-bending mystery or revisiting the classics. Based on obnoxious remarks regarding said "trashy" romance novels I've taken to placing them in turtle backs so the cheesey covers aren't the first thing one notices and when asked what I'm reading I actually get a chance to describe the plot before the snide comments and eye rolling set in. Perhaps now I'll discard the turtle backs (although they're good for keeping my paperbacks from getting torn up as they're hauled here, there and everywhere) and use your argument instead. Great blog Karen :)

[Kerry, the Martial Tart]

Late to the party today, but I must add my thanks for the awesome post, Karen. I remember the first time I listened to the director's commentary to "Dirty Dancing"; during the scene in which Baby first watches Johnny dance, she talked about how feminist film critics later noted that this was probably the first movie that really featured the female gaze. Even then, though, I never fully realized how fully the male gaze had become mainstream (vs. just obnoxious, sexist, and problematic on a lot of levels).

Can't wait to check out your books -- romances and otherwise!

[Josh]

No kidding, Kerry? I always tell people that Dirty Dancing was a feminist movie, but I get shouted down. Of course, I also say that American Pie is a feminist movie, so maybe that affects my credibility just a tad.

[Ashlyn Chase]

I love everything you said. I was one of those who put down romance after reading only one in the seventies--until Diana Gabeldon changed my mind.

Now, as an author of erotic, straight romance, I get fan letters in which it's evident that men benefit from what we do too! Either directly or indirectly.

My husband is very secure and loves what I write as well as the fact that I write it. You'd think intelligent men would realize that their insecurities are behind SO much of the patriarchal society we live in.

Women's sexuality has threatened men for millennia. I've never understood that. Is it simply that we can have babies and they can't? Do they sense our strength and think we might not need them?

For the men's version of Victoria Secret, go to www.internationalmale.com

Ash

[Uppity]

Very well put! Bravo, from one feminist romance-mystery writer to another. :)

[Jacqueline Seewald]

I don't like weak heroines and don't write about them myself. In THE INFERNO COLLECTION, my romantic suspense mystery thriller out in hardcover from Five Star/Gale, I created a heroine/sleuth who solves her friend's murder on a college campus. She has two male romantic interests and there is strong sexual content, but Kim is a real person who asserts her individual identity against sexist exploiters.