A Good Thriller discussion

When did bodice-rippers become six packs and pantaloon poppers?

LOL!! Where did you read that from?

DJ Zippergirl wrote: "When did bodice-rippers become six packs and pantaloon poppers?"

About the same time the Gay Rights movement REALLY gained momentum?

Romance Novels from Harlequin or Barbara Cartland etc.
I pretty much read most everything else.

Not surprised, Gary. Even today, romance in general is still pretty much targeted to women.

Amber wrote: "Not surprised, Gary. Even today, romance in general is still pretty much targeted to women."

I came close to reading one. A college classmate wrote a romance or three, before she bacame a NY Times best selling author. She and her co-conspirator husband, also a college classmate, wrote bunches of Star Trek novels. I wish she was still writing them.

Romances from Harlequin and the other imprints are completely different from others. Though, a lot of problems come from people that are ashamed to be seen reading one. Which is why the e-book is a godsend for some authors.

Kirsten *Dogs Welcome - People Tolerated" wrote: "Romances from Harlequin and the other imprints are completely different from others. Though, a lot of problems come from people that are ashamed to be seen reading one. Which is why the e-book is a..."

I get plenty of the romance angle in cozies and paranormal/urban fantasy books.

I like romance, but I rarely read a straight romance. Much prefer romantic suspense. But, unlike many of the anti-romance crowd, I like to have some love stories in all my books.

Sean wrote: "What type of book do you NOT read.

I do not like Fantasy, vampires, werewolves...

Do not like Harry Potter type books."

I'm with you Sean. And add the books with the shirtless men on the cover. :)

Makes sense for you, Larry. You're a straight, I think. As much as I dislike the poses some of the women are in on those covers, I also pretty much dislike the shirtless man look on the cover. I prefer my romances to be NOT in the style on the cover... .

In other words, I prefer to NOT be smacked in the face by artwork that screams "I'M A ROMANCE NOVEL! BUY ME! BUY ME!"

I have two covers with shirtless men on them, not to scream at readers, but to first draw their attention to my book, and then to show that the man of any woman's dream takes care of himself and is not the type to lie on the couch all day with his belly hanging over his belt (not attractive to me)

I write wholesome, clean romances but there is passion in them, and that's also a part of it. But I understand that readers probably won't get that; instead they would think like the norm. I may use more shirtless men on my covers, or I may not, but I'm not ashamed:)

That's exactly what I meant by "screaming "I'M A ROMANCE NOVEL! BUY ME! BUY ME!" ," Groovy: "... show that the man of any woman's dream takes care of himself and is not the type to lie on the couch all day with his belly hanging over his belt (not attractive to me) ."

Not attractive to me, either, but I prefer artwork that's more...subtle. Another example is I prefer the original artwork for the hardcover version of the novel version of Jean M. Auel's The Clan of the Cave Bear to any edition of that book with cover art that's a rip off from the God-awful Darryl Hannah movie version.

And believe me the movie WAS awful. It was one of the three movies that led to the creation of the PG-13 rating, the other two being Spielberg's Gremlins and the Spielberg/Lucas collaboration Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

I believe it's the atrocious covers that put some people off. I read somewhere that Harlequin (and other romances) sales went up after the wide use of the e-book.

That being said, it isn't just romances that do this. Anyone remember BORIS' artwork for fantasy novels?

http://www.borisjulie.com/

Like any female warrior would go around like that!

Good point, Kirsten, about Boris Vallejo's art... .

He also did my favorite picture for the Asimov novel The Naked Sun: https://www.google.com/search?q=Boris...

Not the image I was looking for, though, since I was looking for the image of of R. Giskard Reventlov that Boris did for a blue leather covered version of that novel for a special commission by the Sci-FI Book Club... These editions were published soon after Asimov's death... .

I understand, too, Amber. And I appreciate what you said:)

And wow, that's what Vellejo's covers are. I'd like to think that if I had a body like that, I would walk around in skimpy warrior attire--Just Kidding!!!:)

We can dream, can't we?

You're welcome.

Boris' wife Julie Bell paints just like her husband. I'm actually a fan of both, but also Frank Frazetta, Roy Krenkel, Michael Whalen, Greg and Tim Hildebrand and many others. I walked halfway across Manhattan to view the original paintings of Neal Adams Tarzan paperback covers. Neal is going to be at the big Detroit comic convention this weekend. I am so geeked. Michael Nesmith will be there as will Adam West and Burt Ward.

We now resume our normal topic discussion . ;)

LOL.

Sean wrote: "What type of book do you NOT read.

I do not like Fantasy, vampires, werewolves...

Do not like Harry Potter type books."

I do not read these either. I also do not like straight romance or science fiction.

I don't read teenage vampire/werewolf/monster romances ( Twighlight-ish ) and I also don't read much historical fiction. I' do read older books set in historical times, but these generally have little-to-nothing to do with the historical background. I also don't read Christian literature, despite being a Christian. Also, I stay away from zombie and apocalypse books.

I agree with you, David. I'm a Christian, also, but I don't read Christian literature. I will look at a classic vampire, werewolf, and monster movie without the romance, but I won't read them.

No half-naked men on the covers, for me either. I'm not interested in the story lines, and I'm perfectly content with my couch potato :P

No vampires or warewolves. Nothing sappy. No cozy mysteries. I'm also not fond of book series. I prefer stand alones.

I generally stay away from Christian literature - I don't want to be preached at.

I love classic horror from the 50's and 60's. But I also don't mind paranormal romance. I just don't like romance by itself. But I love the idea of true love.

As I've never been married and it's been decades since my last date, I need some vicarious thrills. Maybe people that have a love life don't need a second life.

Abby wrote:I'm also not fond of book series. I prefer stand alones.

I read stand-alones, but I prefer series. When I reach the end of a stand-alone, I always ask, "What happened next?"

The other reasons I favor series:
1/ I don't have to 'bond' with a new character in every book.
2/ Each book in the series is like re-connecting with an old friend.
3/ I like to see how the main character(s) evolve over the course of the books.

I used to avoid fantasy, Horror, and Drama. But I tried these genres and I was surprised that I loved some of these books, and I felt a different reading pleasure. So I think readers should try new genres sometimes, pick a story they find interesting and have a new reading experience.

I love getting to know new characters, it's like meeting a new friend. When I get to the end of a stand-alone, the author has wrapped it up so neatly, (most times) that I know they lived on happily. And if the characters are so popular that readers want to read more about them in another storyline, then it becomes a sequel, which I will read.

I read one series, the Caulder family saga by Janet Dailey, and I never read any more. Although I completely enjoyed it, it was hard going through generations where the old characters had long died out. I didn't like the fact that my favorite heroine and hero had grown old and died, and a new generation had taken their place. So I stick to stand alones, too. (I know--I know)

NO MOOBS. Some of these romance cover boys have man boobs bigger than mine.

:-S

MOOBS! You learn a new word everyday. LOL!!! I agree, Zippergirl:)

DJ Zippergirl wrote: "NO MOOBS. Some of these romance cover boys have man boobs bigger than mine.

:-S"

LOL I'll have to remember that word.

Groovy wrote: "I love getting to know new characters, it's like meeting a new friend. When I get to the end of a stand-alone, the author has wrapped it up so neatly, (most times) that I know they lived on happily..."

I'm a big fan of the In Death series and I have a similar feeling. It's like going to a reunion and checking up on old friends!

DJ Zippergirl wrote: "NO MOOBS. Some of these romance cover boys have man boobs bigger than mine.

:-S"

I think that's why some of the women ogle the half naked men... .

Gary: I have two videos that are tributes to Boris Vallejo and Frank Frazetta.

Boris: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VotE... The music in this one is by James Horner. Burning Tracks/Battle of the Parapets from the movie KRULL

I couldn't find my Frazetta video, but the one I have uses Creedence Clearwater Revival's Born on the Bayou as the music.

I'll check those out Amber. I have most of the trade paperbooks containing Frazetta's paintings and some of his pen and ink work.

Btw, did you know that Boris is frequently his own male model?

So did Frank Frazetta, Gary.

Amber wrote: "So did Frank Frazetta, Gary."

Yep however Boris uses himself way more than Frank ever did.

Probably right about that.

I'm sure this has been mentioned by others, but given my personal tastes and preferences, it would be a cold day in hell before I'd waste time on a book featuring rampaging vampires. Oh, and add in bodice ripping romances. I certainly don't mind some romance in a book, but there needs to be much more substance to the story than some bare chested adonis ravishing a misunderstood heroine. If there are "moobs" on the cover, it's a good bet this is not the book for me.

Although I have nothing against gays and lesbians, I probably wouldn't read gay romances simply because a lot of romances, including heterosexual ones, are poorly written and badly edited excuses for porn. Need I mention FSOG?

Take Iron Maiden's advice, Marilee, and "run for the hills" when BOTH cover models have moobs!

Wouldn't FSOG be considered Erotica, not necessarily romance? Romance novels are usually written about two people finding that one true love they will spend the rest of their life with. Unless they're labeled as sexually graphic, like in a line of books sold by Harlequin's, There are some really good romance novels out there with substance. Let's not trash all romance novels and put them in the same stereotypical section.

Yes, I'm a romance novelist, and a writer of suspense. I looovvvee writing them. My books are wholesome, written around love of family, but mostly about true love between two people. Do I have bare chested men on a couple of my covers? I do. (I don't think they have MOOBS, do they?) But that goes to the story on the inside. For instance, one has a bare chested man on the cover--why?--because that particular character is a card-carrying playboy and you get an idea of the type of person he is when you read the book. Some readers get it, some don't. But that's okay, I understand. Romance novels get so stereotyped a lot. But there are some good ones out there. That's what inspired me to start writing about true love--because of the good ones I read when I was younger.

I'm just saying...

I hope everyone has a good day--Amber.

I'm with you on that. Some Romance novels are very good. We could have this same discussion about any genre of books, really. Erotica just gets a very hard knock because a lot of it is centered on Erotic content. Obviously.

Groovy wrote: "Wouldn't FSOG be considered Erotica, not necessarily romance? Romance novels are usually written about two people finding that one true love they will spend the rest of their life with. Unless they..."

I said most, Groovy, not all. I read the ones that are closer to your definition...or at least I try to. As for what you said about FSOG: All porn is erotica but not all erotica is porn. The difference, or so it seems to me, is how detailed it is. Erotica doesn't seem to be as explicit as porn. Or at least that's how I see it.

An example of how I see the difference are the first and third novels in Annette Blair's Works Like Magick series: Naked Dragon and Vampire Dragon: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6... and https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8... (I haven't yet read book #2, Bedeviled Angel,. Haven't found a copy)

How I define a good romance is best exemplified in the stories in this book (except for the one set in contemporary Santa Fe, New Mexico...it's awful in it's premise in my opinion): https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3... And while there is sex, it's not the sole focus of the stories. Read it or yourself, I guess is the best way to distill what I'm trying to say about the difference.

And yes, if he has well developed pectoral muscles, he definitely has moobs! But like you said about that particular story, he WAS a playboy... .

David: See what I just said to Groovy.

Thank-you for that, Amber. You learn something new everyday. I had no idea there was such a difference between porn and erotica, and that porn is more explicit--what??

And I'll take your word about the differences you read in the books you suggested. But I cannot read them. Explicit sex, in porn or erotica, just offends me. You've helped me to understand, though.

My guys have moobs--LOL!! I'm going to have to do something different in the future:)

It isn't all that explicit in any of the books I mentioned, or at least it doesn't seem that explicit to me, Groovy.

As to the men on the covers of Naked Dragon and Vampire Dragon they have moobs because you should probably expect it of men who were once Roman legionaires, enchanted into dragons and then turned BACK into men...think of how much exercise their pectorals got as wings! Of course it helps that the setting is a fictionalized version of contemporary Salem, Massachusetts... Witchcraft Capital of America!

The most explicit sex in the anthology collection Dragon Lovers is in the story set in contemporary Santa Fe. The stories set in 17th century Japan, 11th century England/Cornwall and the fictional setting of Saragond aren't as explicit as it is in Santa Fe. There's literally no detail in the story set in Japan, Anna and the King of Dragons and even less in the story set in England/Cornwall, The Dragon and the Black Knight.

That said, I'm not gonna try to convince you to read them. If you're going to decide to read them, you'll do it on your own, without my help. If you're going to decide to NOT read them, you'll do it without any help from me as well.

That goes for David as well...lol.

Groovy wrote: "Wouldn't FSOG be considered Erotica, not necessarily romance? Romance novels are usually written about two people finding that one true love they will spend the rest of their life with. Unless they're labeled as sexually graphic, like in a line of books sold by Harlequin's, There are some really good romance novels out there with substance. Let's not trash all romance novels and put them in the same stereotypical section."


It falls under romance rather than erotica because of the tropes. It fit romance because it was they fell in love and "healed" each other, married and lived happily ever after with children.

Erotica is mainly sex in a story with little plot, the FSOG only had a few sex scenes. It takes over 100 pages for a sex scene to actually happen, when in Erotica it's usually within the first chapter or so. There's a lot of romances I've read that have a lot more sex scenes than FSOG, it's a misconception about the book IMO, and I don't categorize it as Erotica because of that.

Usually I don't like erotica either - to me it's rather boring :/

Still loving the word "Moobs"

Better than the word "bluoobs," Erin. It was coined in this video and is a portmanteau of the words "blue" and "boobs" about the people in the movie AVATAR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs3sV...

Did you get that, David?:) Amber said it!

Thanks, Erin, for explaining. And actually, I wish I'd never heard the word:/

Yes I did ;) She's a very smart lady.

I still roll my eyes when I hear that word about the female Na'vi, David.

Sorry, Amber. But you are more intelligent than me, at least in that subject.