Paranormal Romance & Urban Fantasy discussion

A snooty member in my writing critique group said I have to dumb down my writing if I want to write romance.

Me: WTF? (yes, I said it aloud and sneered at her) Romance characters can have big vocabularies and know how to use them.

Snooty bitch: Not at all. Romance fans, especially paranormal readers, read at a seventh grade level. They won't understand what deltoids and rhomboids are.

Me (after I pick my jaw off the floor at her audacious assumption): Well, if a word is new to a reader, they can look it up. It's extremely easy to do on an ereader.

Snooty bitch, laughing: They won't. If you want to sell books, you can't make your readers feel dumb.

Thank god the group meets in the back room of a tavern. Rather than punch the bitch in the mouth, I went to the bar and got a drink to calm down.

(Is cussing okay in this group? If not, I apologize. :( )

Please, please, tell me the snooty bitch is wrong. Not all my characters are super smart, but I prefer to give the girls relatively decent IQs.

Thoughts?
Good comebacks for the next critique meeting? LOL.

Well, the snooty bitch has obviously never met me or my work colleagues as we all read romance and have doctorates in English Literature. I guess she's also never read Eloisa James who is a Harvard graduate, has an MA from Oxford and a Ph.D. from Yale. She is also a tenured associate professor of English Literature at Fordham University.

Next time you see the woman, rub THAT in her face!

As someone who was forced to sit through the movie Idiocracy, I say dumbing it down will only get us there faster. The look up feature on my reader is one of the reasons I prefer it over hardcopy books.

Stick to your guns, UNLESS, you are using such obscure language that it affects the flow. I love a wide vocabulary, but let me read the story. It goes both ways. Poorly written prose makes me insane and bugs me far more than running across a word I don't understand. There is nothing worse than paying for a book that reads like a grade school composition experiment.

I agree with Becky. You can't be so verbose a reader feels like they're thumbing through a thesaurus. They may look up one or two words for clarity, but if they have to do so every few pages, they're less likely to continue reading.

There's a fine line between eloquent language and sentences so wrought with "two dollar words" that it interrupts the flow. That's not necessarily a reflection on the reader, either. I have a massive vocabulary, and even I don't like authors who are overly verbose. Almost seems like they're showing off.

Not that I'm accusing you of this, of course. But I think both you and your writing group colleague had valid points!

Knowing your target audience is key, but it gets dangerous to over generalize. The reader with a PhD is just as likely to flame or write a scathing review if they don't like something. Granted, there will be readers that don't like xyz...

Write the story you believe in, know what areas you are willing to compromise, and stick to it.

Say what!!!!???? I'd look for another group.

The snooty bitch is obviously not marketing to the right group. Maybe she really is going for the lowest denominator.

Your story will find it's audience. Write the story you want to and need to. If you believe in your story, the reader will too.

In the meantime, you might want to look for or start a new group!

I wish I could say I'm surprised by her assumption, but sadly, I'm not. I came across this stereotype a lot while researching for my thesis, and had several people, both readers of the genre and some who shun it as ick-stupid-stuff tell me that PNR readers devalue the genre and are the ones perpetuating the stereotype. :(

Also, did this person really think people don't know what deltoids and rhomboids are??!! If so, then shout out to my 6th grade P.E. class for making me so smart! ; )

Isis wrote: "I wish I could say I'm surprised by her assumption, but sadly, I'm not. I came across this stereotype a lot while researching for my thesis, and had several people, both readers of the genre and s..."

Well... rhomboids wasn't one I was familiar with. I knew what deltoids were, though!

I also think context has a lot to do with it... if you said something like "his rhomboids flexed," I would get that they were a muscle group. So you can totally use "advanced" words and have them be understandable as long as you illustrate it for us.

Ask her if she reads romance. If she she says she does, tell her she must not be reading very good romance.

Every genre has varying levels of quality, and she needs to get the hell over herself. Romance has been the highest selling genre in fiction for some time now. Sour grapes perhaps?

Snooty bitch.

Lana wrote: "I also think context has a lot to do with it..."

I agree, Lana. Recently I read Stephen King's "On Writing." It was a helpful book and while I don't agree with everything he says, he made some great points and suggestions.

Of course, he addresses the vocabulary issue. He encourages writers not to, "dress up the vocabulary, looking for long words because you're maybe a little bit ashamed of your short ones." He's probably addressing the insecure writer with this sentence, but I think the logic is sound. Simplicity can be beautiful.

Everyone has their unique style and I tend to be open minded as long as it's grammatically correct.

Rachel ~ SnapDragoness wrote: "Every genre has varying levels of quality, and she needs to get the hell over herself. Romance has been the highest selling genre in fiction for some time now. Sour grapes perhaps?"

I know this is a different situation, but it reminds me of the situation where an author wrote/said/blogged "the reader read it wrong."

WTH?

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Attacking the audience will not sell books. It will just piss off a bunch of people. If I fail to clearly tell my story, that's MY fault!

Lumping all romance fans into grade school vocabulary "ain't too bright, neither." ; )

Why do smart women read romance? As an English professor myself, I read romance because it takes me away from all the reading and writing I do for my job. It also helps me cope with grading freshman composition papers. Here are some articles to pass on to SB:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-br...

http://books.usatoday.com/happyeveraf...

alligator wrote: "Why do smart women read romance? As an English professor myself, I read romance because it takes me away from all the reading and writing I do for my job. It also helps me cope with grading fresh..."

Love both of those. Thank you!

Becky wrote: "Lana wrote: "I also think context has a lot to do with it..."

I agree, Lana. Recently I read Stephen King's "On Writing." It was a helpful book and while I don't agree with everything he says, ..."

I love King's "On Writing," especially his work flow. However, I do disagree with him on the point of vocabulary.

The words a character uses to communicate speaks to his/her personality. It's a way to differentiate characters. In the story/scene we read at critique last night, the heroine's a psychology major.

Thanks, Becky for your encouragement. I WILL stick to my guns.

Lauren wrote: "Well, the snooty bitch has obviously never met me or my work colleagues as we all read romance and have doctorates in English Literature. I guess she's also never read Eloisa James who is a Harvard..."

Right! I still can't believe she assumed that. I'm toying with writing a bogus scene filled with four and five syllable words just to mess with her.

I agree about the vocabulary and personality, especially when it comes to fleshing out our characters. They'd all sound the same!

Enjoy writing your story! As you wrestle with these things, it will boost your confidence in the story. When you're ready to publish, it'll be something you're truly proud to put your name on (and it's YOUR name, not the Snotty B's). ; )

Best of lucky to you, Dany!

Lana wrote: "I also think context has a lot to do with it... if you said something like "his rhomboids flexed..."

This is so true! After I posted I remembered that both of those words also describe shapes, so if you wrote something like "It's somewhat deltoid-like," without context, it could be about the muscle, or you could be talking about the area of the Bermuda triangle. Which made me think about how it's life context too, because whether readers know a word, or how they interpret it is going to depend on their own life experience.

I know this is a strange comparison, but consider video games. The most successful video games ever made have been games that had hardware requirements low enough that almost anyone with a computer could play the game.

The way I see it, keeping the language in your book simple is much like keeping the hardware requirements of a game low so the most people can buy and enjoy your product.

Can you still sell a book with verbose language? Sure. Will it sell as much as it otherwise would have? No, I don't think so.

Theres plenty of smart people out there who can read complex language without a problem. That said, for every one of them theres at least 3 that either can't or WONT put in that sort of effort and will just skip buying your book at the first sign of a customer review that says "too wordy".

I can only comment based on the books I have read and those I am writing; write the book you want to read. If you are happy with it, chances are others will be too. There will always be things that can be tweaked or improved, but that could be said of any authors work.

Dany Rae wrote: "Right! I still can't believe she assumed that. I'm toying with writing a bogus scene filled with four and five syllable words just to mess with her. "

Go for it!

I don't like when an author uses big obscure words that interrupt the flow of the story, but who wants just stupid characters. Give us smart & dumb. Good characters are important, and that includes different kinds of skill sets & IQ. Deltoid is not a big word, but if the reader is not familiar with that part of the body they probably can figure it out from the rest of the conversation around it.
Some people are snotty snobs and look down on romance books as just being sex and mindless characters. Often they're opinionated people who think the world revolves around them and their way is the only way, & thinks that a vampire automatically dumbs down the book. I have a Bachelor degree in business, and read nothing but paranormal books (I prefer vampires). That's my preference for books, but I read the entire newspaper daily. My reading preference does nothing to change my IQ or lower my reading level (which is well above 7th grade). I know I'm not the smartest critter around, and always hated English in school, but I'm far from stupid. I also know how to let others have their reading options, even if they differ from mine.

Ignore the B*@#h, keep writing. Come up with some really big obnoxious snotty words to share with her and how she's acting, at your next meeting.

In terms of the characters intelligence, I have to say that terminal stupidity does seem to be an extremely common theme. This is especially true of PNR.

How many times have we seen something like this:

"My love, you are safe here. As long as you remain on the grounds of this property nobody can ever harm you and you will spend the rest of your life in eternal bliss and happiness."

"Wow honey that sounds awesome! Let me just cruise on down to my old apartment well outside the bounds of the safe zone so I can squee to my old girlfriend about how lucky I am to have all my problems solved!"

or perhaps

"As long as you do not bear my mark you will be vulnerable to being taken by someone else. But once you bear my mark you will be safe and protected under the laws of my people. Let me mark you. It will take like five fucking minutes and will feel super good too."

"Well it sounds like I need to waffle for weeks while wallowing in indecision. Clearly this marking thing needs to be put off as long as possible"

The problem is that writers in PNR tend to write themselves into a jam and don't have the chops or interest to write a complex scene in which the heroine is put in danger because of thing that happen in the world. Instead they take the cheap, easy way out by erasing her brains and having her do something so unfathomably stupid that it defies all sanity.

I have only read a handful of books in which something like this does not happen. They are few and far between believe me.

Waffle wrote: "In terms of the characters intelligence, I have to say that terminal stupidity does seem to be an extremely common theme. This is especially true of PNR.

How many times have we seen something like..."

Hmmm. While I agree that PNR has an overabundance of stupid characters (especially female ones), it seems to me that stupid characters and dumbed down writing are separate issues…?

I agree Isis......

Isis wrote: "Waffle wrote: "In terms of the characters intelligence, I have to say that terminal stupidity does seem to be an extremely common theme. This is especially true of PNR.

How many times have we seen..."

Yup!

I can't stand literary snobbery. Who made her the authority on what is intelligent writing and what isn't. Filling your book or story up with SAT words does not cover up for poor writing, a boring story, lack of plot, freaking comma splices and all that other crap that I have no idea about.

I don't read romance or PNR/UF for literary enlightening. I read it because it's fun, it gives my brain a break from the ridiculous stuff on television, I actually learn A LOT such as mythology from other countries, figures in history, etc. and I like when authors take creative license with things. It's fun to see where someone's imagination will take them.

If I need to go DEEP and get all philosophical and S*** I can actually name some PNR/UF that has underlying tones/themes...motifs that go beyond the story of a vamp, were, etc. and actually dive into questions of oppression, privilege, race, class, whatever.

My new favorite phrase that I would never say aloud

Eff you and everybody who feels like you. LOL that a comeback that might end up in a brawl hahaha.

off my soapbox

Isis wrote: "Hmmm. While I agree that PNR has an overabundance of stupid characters (especially female ones), it seems to me that stupid characters and dumbed down writing are separate issues…?
"

Well the title of the thread is "Writing group says romance characters can't be smart" so I thought I would address it.

Waffle wrote: "Isis wrote: "Hmmm. While I agree that PNR has an overabundance of stupid characters (especially female ones), it seems to me that stupid characters and dumbed down writing are separate issues…?
"

..."

I too get rather tired of all the TSTL female leads in whatever type of romance books. I love a book where both the male and female leads are smart, have common sense, and work well together to fix whatever problem is happening.

I'm not a fan of TSTL heroines either, but lately I've been wondering if the TSTL heroine phenomenon exists partly as a quick and simple writing device to allow the hero to save her.

If heroines made better decisions, there would be less saving required. Or more thought would be required on the author's behalf to create believable conflict.

Of course not all h's are TSTL; some manage to get into trouble even without all the bad decision-making. ☺

Eh, just a thought.

Rachel wrote: "...more thought would be required on the author's behalf to create believable conflict."

Exactly. For a "smart" woman/heroine to get in a bind, the author has to think outside the box. Would my character do this? Wouldn't she know better? If her instincts are sharp, how do I get around the element of surprise? Manipulation? Baiting a trap? Hmm... That requires setting up a scenario instead of: "Betty Sue went on a walk at midnight in the woods..."

While it's not a vocabulary issue, it's still a basic writing skill. One of my favorite heroines in PNR is Mercy Thompson. I've just started the series, but the author fleshes out her characters nicely, allowing them their emotions and flaws, but also their wits.

On a side note, the author also dropped several adjectives that I had to look up, but not so many that I was distracted. They were kind of random, although one really fit the snotty-ness of the vampire character. I'm curious to see if she does it again in her next book.

I'd rather have big words than an over-abundance of unnecessary F-bombs, but that's just personal preference.

Rachel ~ SnapDragoness wrote: "I'm not a fan of TSTL heroines either, but lately I've been wondering if the TSTL heroine phenomenon exists partly as a quick and simple writing device to allow the hero to save her.

If heroines ..."

I believe it is a lazy device, and not just in romance, but in thrillers and mysteries as well. It's certainly more interesting to have characters make seemingly good choices and still windup in a bad spot. Then, again, perhaps that too much like real life ... and who the hell wants to read about real life. :)

Becky ♡The Bookworm♡ wrote: "Rachel wrote: "...more thought would be required on the author's behalf to create believable conflict."

Exactly. For a "smart" woman/heroine to get in a bind, the author has to think outside the..."

Patricia Briggs is one of my favorite authors.

Dany Rae wrote: "Patricia Briggs is one of my favorite authors."

I love, love, LOVED Moon Called. I can't wait to finish the series and start the Alpha & Omega books. Her writing is super clean and she keeps things moving. It was a real refershing read, especially after 600 pages of Kristen Ashley. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed The Gamble, but wow...it got bogged down in detail. The story carried it though.

Love it when a book can make me cry! I don't care (much) about wordiness or big vocabulary if the story can do that!

TSTL = Too Stupid To Live? Or something else?

Nevada wrote: "TSTL = Too Stupid To Live? Or something else?"

Too stupid to live, yep!

I actually prefer reading a book where the female has a brain . If they are too stupid to read a book with a woman who has a brain let them get back to watching essex. If they really complain put a mini description page with the harder words.

Waffle wrote: "Well the title of the thread is "Writing group says romance characters can't be smart" so I thought I would address it."

Haha you're right! And it should be addressed! I refuse to believe that a book can only be entertaining if characters are stupid or it doesn't say anything smart and meaningful (actually, I'd argue that PNR says a lot of meaningful stuff, but people choose to ignore it if they are able to).

I had a few contest judges and agents read my new adult paranormal romance, and one of the most common responses I received was along the lines of, "love it but readers don't want to have to pay attention when they read." No one said the words "dumb it down" but it was clear that it was what they meant. It was always worded like, "romance readers don't want to have to think when they read." As a romance reader and writer, I was flattered and insulted simultaneously.

Hey Folks, it's all about the words and how they flow into one another. I love Patricia Briggs too (don't wait to read A & O, they interweave w/Mercy), but I also read Nora Roberts. She covers all genres from Historical thru PNR and Futuristic nearly Scifi. None of her characters are "TSTL"! It's all in the word-crafting.

Dany Rae wrote: "A snooty member in my writing critique group said I have to dumb down my writing if I want to write romance.

Me: WTF? (yes, I said it aloud and sneered at her) Romance characters can have big vo..."

I can't say snooty bitch is wrong, it's her opinion. But I can definitely say that I prefer books that are written intelligently. Smart characters with plot that makes me think. The book doesn't have to contain big words it just has to be well thought out.
Finally, I commend you for not punching the snooty bitch ;)

I agree with C.C. Intelligent writing doesn't always require large or complex words, but I don't feel there is a need to dumb down anything for readers. There's such a wide variety of writers and readers, there's a place for every style.

Becky ♡The Bookworm♡ wrote: "I know this is a different situation, but it reminds me of the situation where an author wrote/said/blogged "the reader read it wrong."
"

That would be the asshat (oops... was that out loud) author John Green regarding readers that did not enjoy the last installment of the Divergent series. He claims that if we didn't like the story, if it made us unhappy, thought it blew chucks, and thought that it was barely worthy of wiping our own ass, that we must have "read it wrong". According to him, it's the reader's responsibility... "The author is dead but the book isn't. Readers still have obligations to the text itself (to read it generously, etc)."

Sorry... I have very strong feelings about this particular issue, and this particular asshat author. My apologies to anyone that loves him, and his work; this is not a reflection upon you, but upon my hatred of his public comments and thoughts about what readers are 'obligated' to do.

And now, in regard to 'dumbing down' and TSTL characters and/or dialogue. I'm a fan of write what you like. If that character is going to use $2 words, then let them use the words and she can go make her own character so stupid that I want to reach through my Kindle and throttle them and stick their own book where the sun don't shine. If it's good writing, regardless of the vocabulary and the intelligence level of the main characters, it should find an audience. Just like one of my professors said in regard to 'artists' in general (and I consider writing an 'art') it's 10% talent and 90% sweat. Does a book need to be thought provoking to be popular, no. Just look at 50 Shades (which I loved for entertainment value- don't judge) - even the greatest fan cannot refute the fact that it's really not the best writing (in regard to technical writing skills and over-use of many things). But hell, it sold, can't deny that fact. Now let's use something completely different to foil E.L. James - Shakespeare. He wrote for his audience, yes, ALL of them. There were jokes within jokes- some would appeal to the 'base' audience (think of Dumb & Dumber slaptick and 'potty' humor) and the refined audience (puns, plays on words, metaphors) alike. There were things that would 'fly over the heads' of certain groups in the audience, but that was part of the draw- there was something for everyone.

So... TSTL characters have their time and place. Do I prefer them? No. Absolutely not. Can I handle them when the book demands it- if I'm entertained, sure.

Sorry, but I'm the type of person to tell that snooty bitch that if I wanted her to climb up my ass, I'd had her a bottle of lube. If she wants to spoon-feed her readers, and treat them like they as TSTL, then let her.

One of my favorite YA Paranormal series, it actually starts each and every chapter with an S.A.T. word and definition. I love it, and it suits the books and the characters. Who is she to speak for millions of readers and be the dictator of what is acceptable and not acceptable for romance books? *Hands snooty bitch a quater* Here's a quarter, buy a clue. In fact, here is $0.50, I think she needs two clues: one to find her ass to pull the stick out of it, and the other to realize she's not the 'authority' on romance.

Sorry for my filthy mouth... but I am very, very passionate about authors 'dictating' how I am supposed to read, what I am supposed to read, and how I am supposed to feel about what I've read. It's a hot button of mine.

Also, another quote from John Green (sorry, can't help myself) "my job as a reader is to make the text in front of me into the best book it can possibly be"

No, that's that job of a writer not the reader. If you can't make the book 'the best book it can possibly be' why should it be the reader's job to do that for you? We don't expect members of the church to write the Pastor's sermons, we don't expect movie-goers to watch a film in such a way to make it 'the best film ever' (*cough*Gigli, anyone*cough*). We don't go to eat at McDonald's and expect the customers to treat the food like it's a 5♥ fine dining experience.

Oh, I love the idea of starting each chapter with a definition. Filing that away for possible future use.

Thanks for reminding me about Shakespeare, Alana. The Bard wrote for the masses, as you said, with crude humor and language. In his day, it was the rich and privileged who attended theater. They ridiculed him horribly for his style.

And thanks to everyone for your encouragement to tell the story my way. It helps more than you know to ease author self doubt. <3<3

Answering those who messaged asking to read it for themselves: The novel is being serialized on Wattpad (a PG-13 version, because, hey, it's Wattpad - LOL). I don't want to spam, so I won't post a link. However, it should be easy to find given that it's the only work of mine on the site.

Dany Rae wrote: "A snooty member in my writing critique group said I have to dumb down my writing if I want to write romance.

Me: WTF? (yes, I said it aloud and sneered at her) Romance characters can have big vo..."

Don't listen to that person. You write the way you would want to read. That is the truest form of any art.