Clean Romances discussion

Hello, fellow romance fans!

I just wanted to mention that I added a new folder "Book Chat" for any discussions on a particular author or book. If you want to praise or dissect a specific author or book, such as Georgette Heyer or even more specifically her book The Black Moth, that would be the folder to put the discussion in.

Any questions? Please ask them here. (There's probably some issue I've overlooked.) I will go back through old "General Chat" discussions and move any threads that qualify as specific "Book Chat."

Thank you for your time. Happy reading! :o)

Great idea, Jaimey! Thanks for setting up this folder.

Have you by any chance recently finished reading The Black Moth? :-) It's been a super-long time since I've read it, but it's sequel (with major character name changes) These Old Shades is one of my GH favorites.

I actually started reading "The Black Moth" many, many months ago and then it got put on a back burner. :o(

Careful, Joyce. If we get too involved in this discussion I may have to move this thread to the new "Book Chat" folder. ;o)

Come to think of it, I probably should move this to the "Book Chat" folder. It is practically an instruction thread already.

Jaimey wrote: "Come to think of it, I probably should move this to the "Book Chat" folder. It is practically an instruction thread already."

I don't remember enough about "The Black Moth" to actually discuss it yet. Guess that means it's time to pull it out and read it again! (Maybe soon.)

When considering a book to add to the bookshelf is the marital status of the characters relevant? I understand the idea of clean romance, a friend of mine once described it as "no romance with perspiration". I am considering posting a YA Fantasy book. However, I need clarification. There is no sexual or sensual content. There are promiscuous characters, there are characters who in the end wind up together but do not marry within the pages of the book. As I understand the purpose of this group, this book would be acceptable because it is free of graphic descriptions and overly sensual descriptions. Have I correctly understood?

Lenore wrote: "When considering a book to add to the bookshelf is the marital status of the characters relevant? I understand the idea of clean romance, a friend of mine once described it as "no romance with pers..."

Hi Lenore,

If the hero and heroine are promiscuous, whether graphically described or not, then the title would not belong on our bookshelf. I think the way to look at it is, if characters are promiscuous without any consequences, i.,e., if this book is basically saying to the readers, "It's okay to be promiscuous and/or it's okay to have sex without getting married, it's not a big deal,", then it probably wouldn't make a good fit for our bookshelf. Does that make sense?

"If the hero and heroine are promiscuous, whether graphically described or not, then the title would not belong on our bookshelf."

I didn't realize these were the specifications for the books on the bookshelves here....I think I need to remove a couple of the books I put there, if that's the case. Maybe could we have a separate topic/shelf for books of this nature that are clean in the writing, but maybe "off scene" they don't live up to high standards? It seems to me that some books describing kissing scenes might make you blush but are still considered "clean" and so they would be on our bookshelf. Yet, another book is so clean in the writing, w/o cause for blushing, but because the characters were "promiscuous" it wouldn't make it on our shelf. So maybe a separate topic or area for listing books like that?

I have to agree with April. There are a few books on here that fit more with what she is saying most definitely. I'm also wondering if it is more a phrasology mix-up with Lenore's books because it sounds as if her characters end up in the right place???

April wrote: ""If the hero and heroine are promiscuous, whether graphically described or not, then the title would not belong on our bookshelf."

I didn't realize these were the specifications for the books on t..."

April, starting a new bookshelf is okay with me. I agree that it's impossible to please everybody's individual standards in a group like this. I just would like some way for people to have a hint about what they'll be getting when they pick up a certain title, so if they don't want to read it they can skip it, but if someone else does, then they can read it. I hate to try to go the "rating" route again, like I set up to do with language complaints. I think the bookshelf route would work, if you and/or Linda can think up a title for it that would make the theme of such books clear for potential readers.

I think what I was trying to say is what Linda expressed much more clearly. If the writing is "so clean...w/o cause for blushing", but the characters "end up in the right place" in the end, then it needn't be excluded from our group. It's where the characters end up, not where they started out, that I think is important.

Jaimey Grant's romance, Spellbound is a good example. The heroine is an actress, but also an upper-class mistress in Regency England. The scenes between her and her lovers are extremely non-graphic and even sometimes quite tender (more "before and after" type scenes, no actual sex scenes involved), but when she becomes the heroine of her own story in Spellbound, she and the hero "end up in the right place" in the end. Lessons learned along the way ultimately bring them there. So the line about "promiscuity" is not hard and fast. It's how it's handled within the romance that makes the difference.

Is that still clear as mud? Feel free to further discuss if you'd like, until we all figure it out. :-)

Bravo, Joyce! I think you answered it very well. Sometimes it just takes a bit more to make sure everyone is on the same page. I'm not sure I'm up for the challenge of actually thinking of a bookshelf title, but I'm always in for throwing in my two cents after. ha ha April? Lenore?

Yes, Joyce, I agree with Linda. Thank you very much for your reply, you did a great job clearing it up! My brain has been wracking for a bookshelf title -- 'implied immorality' or something like that. But as we have worked through this issue, I think I'm seeing that any book that would actually advocate immorality would probably also not be sufficiently smut-free to qualify for this group anyway. I'm sure Lenore's books fit in our regular criteria.

We could still create the new bookshelf for the odd book that needed it if you want to, but I would imagine most candidates would end up being 'redemption' type stories of someone with a past who cleans it up. Now that this is a little more clear, I see that the books I've added are just fine. Thanks again.

April wrote: "Yes, Joyce, I agree with Linda. Thank you very much for your reply, you did a great job clearing it up! My brain has been wracking for a bookshelf title -- 'implied immorality' or something like th..."

Thanks, April. I'm glad we (hopefully) cleared that up. :-) I think we'll hold off on adding another shelf for now. If the subject comes up again, we can discuss it further and come to another decision if we think it's appropriate.

I enjoy reading and writing clean romance. I've been looking for others who do the same. My triolgy: Changed on the Inside includes the titles of: Jennie and Susie; Annie Duncan; and Elizabeth. They are e-books, found on Kindle and Barnes and Noble. The series begins with Susie having an abortion, and then feeling the guilt and shame, and wanting to stay celebate. Jennie holds out for marriage. Annie stays pure after salvation until marriage. Elizabeth serves God and is pure unto marriage. Does this series qualify for your list?