For Further Confusion…
The March 2006 Romantic Times has, to me, what feels like a bit of a theme. Ellora’s Cave is on the front cover. EC books are on the back cover. Tina Engler (Jaid Black) of EC is profiled. There are stories (note the plural) about erotic romance and erotica. One could get the impression this issue is about the hotter side of romance. RT also made an entry into the definition game. The editors say this:
Erotica - Contains explicit sexual content. Anything goes. Sex is the story. The descriptions are frank and the language graphic. Don’t look for a happy ending here.
Erotic Romance - The hero and heroine make love very early on in these books. No Flowery euphemisms in bed, just straight-talking graphic language. There’s a solid plot and the sex scenes are integral to the relationship. Although multiple partners are acceptable, most couples are in a monogamous relationship and there’s a happy ending.
Hot Romance - Sexual tension permeates these books, and the love scenes, although steamy, are not as frank as in erotic romance. The language and descriptions are tamer. They follow a strict romance format: monogamous relationships and happy endings.
I am not sold on these definitions. I think the lines between Erotic Romance and Hot Romance aren’t quite right. But, taking those definitions, RT then listed Masters of Erotica - that’s RT’s title for the article which should mean these authors write the really explicit stuff. Some of the people listed make some sense to me - such as Emma Holly and Thea Devine, ‘tho I do wonder if these ladies consider their work Erotica or Erotic Romance. Others on the list don’t make any sense at all under RT’s definition. For example, Lori Foster is listed as an erotica master for Too Much Temptation and Wild. I would call those Hot Romances under these definitions. Shannon McKenna is on the list for her Bravas. Don’t agree with that either.
This is what happens when we try to come up with definitions for these things…
February 2nd, 2006 at 5:23 pm
I agree. (shaking head)
February 3rd, 2006 at 10:42 am
Yeah, I just cackled when I got the email saying they were hoping to define the differences between the three and have it be an industry standard. If publishers and authors and readers can’t agree on what is what, why does RT think they can establish anything?
Maybe they need to wake up and realize that eroticism is in the eye of the beholder!
February 3rd, 2006 at 10:49 am
[...] HelenKay posts on RT’s effort to define hot romance, erotic romance, and erotica: I am not sold on these definitions. I think the lines between Erotic Romance and Hot Romance aren’t quite right. But, taking those definitions, RT then listed Masters of Erotica - that’s RT’s title for the article which should mean these authors write the really explicit stuff. Some of the people listed make some sense to me - such as Emma Holly and Thea Devine, ‘tho I do wonder if these ladies consider their work Erotica or Erotic Romance. Others on the list don’t make any sense at all under RT’s definition. For example, Lori Foster is listed as an erotica master for Too Much Temptation and Wild. I would call those Hot Romances under these definitions. Shannon McKenna is on the list for her Bravas. Don’t agree with that either. [...]
February 3rd, 2006 at 11:35 am
If they are trying for an industry standard that would be silly. As Alison Kent says it is subjective.
But I read it as this was their ‘erotica’ issue, I think they did the same thing last year about this time. So if they are trying to define, what RT thinks and how they classify their reviews. I am cool with that.
hee not that they asked me
I haven’t gotten the issue yet… are all the new players talked about or just EC? Last year EC and I guess Brava, were the only HOT lines. But everyone is now in or about to have erotica/romantic erotica lines. I hope they give something of a spotlight on each.
February 3rd, 2006 at 11:56 am
Oh, I totally agree that defining for their own purposes makes sense. (Except like HK said they’ve thrown Lori in with Emma and Thea, eh?)
But the email I got gave the distinct impression they wanted to make an industry wide definition. (If I read that wrong, I apologize to them, and I didn’t keep the email to refer to.)
February 3rd, 2006 at 12:32 pm
The blurb before the definitions says: “Wondering what the difference is between erotica and erotic romance, and when a book simply qualifies as a hot, hot romance? To help guide readers, the RT staff has come up with guidelines that we use to classify the books in our Erotica/Erotic Romance Review section and to define ultra-spicy romances found within other review sections.” I would say these are RT’s definitions, but I do think they are putting them out there as an industry standard. My issue - and this shouldn’t be a big surprise to anyone who drops by here - is this need we have to define everything. When we try, it ends up in a mess. I would NEVER put Lori Foster in an erotica category. I don’t read Cheryl Holt or M.J.Rose (sorry ladies - I will, I promise) but they are on the erotica list too. Are they erotica? Pauline Reage (The Story Of O) and Zane and Jaid Black are on there. Those all seem right to me. I guess. But, the definitions are too mushy for me to tell.
EC was not the only hot romance publisher mentioned. There’s a story titled “Walk on the Wild Side” that talks about Avon’s line, Kensington’s Aphrodisia, Harlequin Spice and Berkley Heat. It was interesting that Audrey LaFehr says on the distinction between Brava and Aphrodisia: “The Aphrodisia books have to be hot. They can’t just be sexy romances, because we do that in Brava already. Brava is romance. A man and a woman fall in love in a monogamous relationship. Aphrodisia can be more than one partner, gay, lesbian [or] group [sex], and they don’t need to pair up in the end. Many times they do, but that’s not the point.
That’s how I see Brava. Look at LaFehr’s statement about Brava then look at RT’s definitions. You can decide if these match and where Brava would fall.
February 3rd, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Erotic Romance - The hero and heroine make love very early on in these books.
So, I have to wonder what they would do with a book labeled erotic romance on the spine by the publisher where the hero and heroine do NOT make love very early on.
But yeah. Lori Foster in the same category as Zane? Who’s smoking what? *ggg*
February 3rd, 2006 at 2:23 pm
There are plenty of purple writers who write erotic romance, and plenty of even medical-sounding writers who write hot romance. I am not crazy about the definitions, either!
February 5th, 2006 at 1:56 am
The biggest thing that hits me is the definition fro Erotica is the shortest one there. When it really should be the longest since erotica is the hardest to define. Why Is the romance community having such a hard time defining erotica? I think it’s because Erotica is NOT romance. It’s been it’s own genre for decades, and not all Erotica is ALL sex. The fact that romances are getting hotter does not change that.
Plus, Like Alison says, what is erotic to one person is not always erotic to another…and trying to shoehorn one person, or one companies definition as an industry standard won’t work. Sometimes it’s eye contact that makes things erotic, or the persons thoughts. It’s not only the sex.
February 5th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Alison says:
Hmmm… the last Brava I turned in didn’t have any sex until almost a couple hundred pages into the book, and it’s definitely erotic romance.
February 6th, 2006 at 11:40 am
[...] Apropos to HelenKay’s post on RT’s defining of erotica, erotic and hot romance, Amy Garvey said late last year: Labels are dangerous. That’s not to say they’re not necessary sometimes, for a lot of reasons, but when it comes to fiction, I think it can be overkill. Does every reader need or want to know exactly what the sexual content of a book is before she reads it? Take Alison Kent, for instance. She writes great sex, but her recent Brava books could easily be classified as action/adventure, too. Is she an author of “erotic romance” or just an author who writes damn good books? (…) Any book you pick up is going to give you a couple of clues about what’s inside. The title, the cover copy, the cover art. There aren’t many erotic romances out there with kittens frolicking on the cover, and a title like “Miss Smith Takes a Walk”. (…) So why is everyone – or is it just us authors? – concerned with where they fall on the erotica scale? [...]
January 31st, 2007 at 9:32 pm
[...] Helenkay blogged For Further Confusion regarding the March Romantic Times trying to, as Alison Kent sez: Define Eroticism . [...]
January 31st, 2007 at 9:45 pm
[...] Helenkay blogged For Further Confusion regarding the March Romantic Times trying to, as Alison Kent sez: Define Eroticism . [...]