The closest I’ve come to a Harlequin romance was a decade ago when I was running a book sale to finance a graduate student association, which I had the unfortunate position of getting elected president to, in a stunning illustration of the sagacity of Oscar Wilde’s observation that the only thing worse than not getting what you want is getting what you want. One member brought in more than two dozen titles from the Harlequin series for our fundraiser. The Toronto publishing house made a fortune on their original business model of importing the British Mills and Boon bodice rippers to North American bookshops. Wikipedia says that they currently publish 120 titles a month. My memory of the book sale, aside from the reckless way some of the proceeds were spent was that the books flew off the table in half the time I had anticipated, and at the end, the only books left were the Harlequins. Since so many women read the romances, I’m guessing that any potential interest they might have generated was shunned by the campus setting. No one wants to get caught going to class holding a book with Fabio on the cover, not if you want to keep your grade point average up.
I’m not interested in shaming women for their taste in bodice-rippers, even if they contribute to the presence of sexual violence in pop culture, as they argue over at Feministing. I’m guessing the women don’t read them as rape scenes, maybe they might more readily identify the heroine of virtue as “being overpowered” or “taken” by the man. There are a million cultural cues that set women up to include submission as frame for their sexual imagination, from the Disney tales about rescue in the guise of a prince, the blow jobs on demand advice guides, or pole-dancing workouts, so it’s easy to understand how women are groomed to swoon over these open-shirted brutes. Instead of blaming women for being dupes who lap it up, my scorn is reserved for a company that exhibits little respect for women readers, the group who have been loyal consumers of Harlequin’s catalogue.
It’s one thing to have a couple posed in an amorous embrace on the cover. It’s a promise of pleasure the reader will take in the romantic, sexual relationship between the lead characters. The heroine and hero entwined announce ‘There Will Be Sex’ for the lady in the library or bookshop. Far be it for me to say a woman has no right to a steamy read at the end of a hard day. But this new range of books from Harlequin, the Mira titles, feature an advertising campaign that ruthlessly makes violence against women normative and sexy. From a casual glance, the ad’s composition of a woman in the supposed enviable position of being gifted a necklace from the man standing behind her appears as a trademark, old-fashioned, romantic ideal the publishing house has used for decades. The woman has flawless beauty with a pronounced look of contentment in her visage. The man is in a tux, adding to the ‘special night out’ feel to the advertisement. Upon closer inspection, however, you’ll notice that the man isn’t slipping gold or jewels around the lady’s neck. He’s dropping a chain of sutures under her throat, in a troubling hobgoblin of sexual and violent imagery. Autopsies are so damn sexy, ladies. Get dressed up for your man so he can slit you open. The campaign insults a fan base with predatory assumptions about women’s right to live free of violence. This crap isn’t sexy, it’s only a ham-fisted attempt to sexualise violence against women.
I don’t know the brand.
I had a quick look at the writing beneath the sutures image
and it says :
“Passion and Thriller now meet”
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm: the market is directed to a largely female
audience , thus one assumes there was a desire for it?
I personally reckon the girl looks like a corpse anyway from
the headshot, so just wanted to add in a quick opinion on that
particular image and how it has been used by (saY) Angela Carter
in her ‘bluebeard’ stories. The intended victim of the voluptary
was given a jewel when she became to be bethrothed him, in the case
of the narrator of ‘The Bloody Chamber’, the girl (for she was
quite young when she agreed to marry Bluebeard) got a ruby-studded
ribbon for her neck, this was literally a pre-figurement of her
eventual end when she had uncovered the other wifely murders.
if you haven’t read it , soz, its a brilliant read with a suitably
feminsty ending , just a hint I suppose of the end that is intended
is in the fact that the ribbons were manufactured and worn with
prode by those hiders and survivors of the guillotine.
I know its not much to go on in relation to how women writers
and readers use fantasy, that is more often than not grounded
in universal archetypes (and fairystories) BUT at one and the
same time one presumes that the books are (i) Market-driven
(ii) female written (?) so there must be some element of
knowledge there in the process of getting people to part with
their moolah.
Of course I’d be well-pissed off if the lot were written by men
to emphasise the objections you brought up there in the article.
Carter used burlesque and grand guignol to marvellous effect but
appealed to both male and female reader.
Personally, I am not a fan of ‘romance’ novels. I do wonder what your take on books like ‘The Story of the Eye’, or ‘Delta of Venus’ would be? One could argue that these are just other forms of erotica. Albeit poorly written (from the little snippets I recall reading years ago).
As a romance author, there are tons of really good authors and books in the genre. Sometimes – most times actually – with large publishing houses authors don’t get to choose the covers.
Looks inspired by Nip/Tuck ads, says I.
heres a Guardian paragraph re Carter who subverted the form
“One shining aperçu that emerges from its pages to spread light through the stories of The Bloody Chamber is that passivity is never a virtue, in fact, even – especially not – in women. “Justine marks the start of a kind of self-regarding female masochism, a woman with no place in the world, no status, the core of whose resistance has been eaten away by self-pity,” wrote Carter, tracing the descendants of De Sade’s heroine Justine down to Marilyn Monroe. Another passage might have been written specifically as an epigraph for The Bloody Chamber: To be the object of desire is to be defined in the passive case. To exist in the passive case is to die in the passive case – that is, to be killed. This is the moral of the fairy tale about the perfect woman ”
@Laboriousliving:
I gave away my only copy of ‘The Story of the Eye’
but used some of the images in a series of stonecuts
and sculptures.
I suppose that Harlequin are mass-marketting fairytale fantasy for grown-ups
Ha, The works of too much nipping and tucking.
http://noor724.wordpress.com/
I find that ad incredibly creepy and nasty, and a huge fail on Harlequin’s part, but there are plenty of lady-friendly romance novels out there. I’d strongly recommend the fabulous site Smart Bitches, Trashy Books, in which two funny feminist romance fans review romances as well as discussing various elements of the novels and the romance publishing business. The two women behind the site have written a great book Beyond Heaving Bosoms: The Smart Bitches’ Guide to Romance Novels, which is an excellent (and very funny) feminist defence of the genre.
My own not-so-guilty romance pleasure – besides Georgette Heyer, who isn’t really a romance novelist in the Mills&Boon/Harlequin sense -is Julia Quinn, a self-described feminist whose books are pure brain-candy – sweet and funny and charming and smart and, yes, romantic. I love them.
As a librarian I’ve heard many different opinions on the value of including Harlequins in public library collections. My former library refused to keep Harlequins on the basis that if our users wanted to purchase these “cheap” books themselves at the grocery store it was their business but the library was not prepared to lower their collection standards to include Harlequins. Now I have just started as the director of a library where women happily check out Harlequins on a daily basis. There is definitely a certain clientele who love their Harlequins and I would be crazy to try and take that away from them.
I’m not certain that the new darker covers for the Mira imprint will be a success. If someone wants to read a Harlequin, they will read it regardless of the cheesy cover. I doubt that trying to disguise Harlequins with a better graphic cover design will do much to increase their sales.
I think this is because women don’t say anything, and the ones that do are labeled nags or worse. But it’s not the women who fight that everything is marketed to–it’s the women who accept this and/or say nothing. As a woman, it’s almost a little silly (I hate to say it because we all have some sort of vice) to knowing read something that demeans you or others like you. Doesn’t that seem a little silly or am I too harsh?
In the end, though, I think it all boils down to what sells. I mean, if stories about strong-willed or (just to take it to an extreme) brutish women sold, then that’s what would be on the shelves. Then we’d have to complain how women are portrayed as violent! A happy medium is in order!
Looks like ‘Dexter’ meets ‘Harlequin’. Is this line intended for the BDSM crowd?
Oh now that was funny!
“Passion and Thriller now meet” What is the difference between this and Sookie Stackhouse novels ? Passion and THRILLER as in mystery, police work, autopsies, stalkers, etc.
It only happens that it’s Harlequin that is publishing them. If the author was Patricia Cornwell, Kathy Reichs or even James Patterson, this cover would have gone unnoticed.
I know from experience that such books shape and mold women’s behavior toward men, romance, sex and relationships. so, I would like for harlequin to publish a few books where the woman is a heroine who saves a few men and then takes Her pick. or maybe She is ugly like medussa and forcably uses a man for sex and romance against his will. or maybe beat and rape him and somewhere along the way, he acquires a taste for such treatment and begs for more! FemDomme romance seems dead and that should change.
OMG!
OMG!!!
Those are freaking cuts!
OMG!!
I’m literary running around the room pausing every two seconds to glare at my screen wondering who the heck…
OMG!!!
I’m still freaking out!!
Great blog.
I used to work in a gian high-street bookshop, and I once came across a Mills and Boon-esque ‘romance’ novel called ‘seduced by the millionair doctor’. I know this form of writing hardly claims to be the most imaginative; but that title isn’t even trying.
@Sylvia. Agree with you totally; very, very freaky.
Yuck. I think that that image — I, too, thought it was a necklace on first glance — just ruined my day.
Yeah they don’t publish “bodice rippers” anymore. that went out with the 80′s. Most heroines in romances are smart and independent these days. (Except for Harelquins Shilloutte line which thrives on female stupidity).
Rape is also out. Safe sex is in.
This is just creepy. It’s a disturbing trend I’ve seen with some paranormal romance writers who seem to be fascinated with sexual violence. Threat of rape was prolific in the early Anita Blake books, if not rape itself. Mercy was raped recently in Patricia Briggs’ series. Her other heroine was brutalized, raped, and beaten down as a start to her Alpha and Omega series. Sookie Stackhouse in Harris’ books was nearly raped. I realize it’s a common crime, but it seems to end up in every book series with a strong female lead.
I can understand rough play or “role playing” but there’s a difference. Adult play should mean he’s going to stop if you tell him, and ultimately the woman is there because she chose to be. It’s not the illegal act of humiliation and violence which is actual rape.
Perhaps it’s these author’s ultimate idea of drama. If that’s the case, why is it necessary to take a strong female lead and automatically have her sexually brutalized somewhere in the series? And from women writers?
I don’t think it’s freaky. I think it’s interesting and have made a mental note to find this line. I like Harlequins – they’re easy reads for me while the kids are at the park or we’re waiting on something. I think they’re UNBELIEVABLY cheesy and annoyingly insipid at times, but still enjoyable.
I do think that Digital Dame may very well be on to something. There’s nothing wrong with dark fantasy – even when it involves sexual situations with the man as the aggressor. I dare say that’s what appeals to a lot of women in today’s high-powered feministic society. We’re not ‘allowed’ to be weak in any area of our lives. The natural desire to be taken care has morphed into something darker because we’re not allowed to EVER be weak. Someone has to overpower you for it to be okay to submit – it’s an easy jump to see how that kind of constant unconscious message to ‘measure up’ can lead to darker books and erotica.
The fantasy is the key – it’s not something that you want to do in real life, and most women won’t every play out that fantasy. But in a controlled situation, with a trusted partner, being the helpless victim (who, in true BSDM role-playing always has the power to stop the game with the use of a safety word) can be quite… stimulating.
~h
[...] Also is the internet making us stupid or giving us short attention spans? [...]
Never read a Harlequin and don’t intend to start, but that image is just disturbing.
I’m not sure what’s going on over at Harlequin, but they’ve been doing some odd things. There was a print-on-demand brouhaha where Harlequin was trying to do a vanity press along with a paid editorial service under the Harlequin banner. I believe that one of the writing groups– maybe Romance Writers of Amerca– took their imprint off of acceptable publications because of it.
I must agree with Amanda. I used to work at a bookstore and there were women who would come around monthly and buy stacks of Harlequins. The only thing that had as loyal an audience were the Menga series. And I’m betting the sexy/violence cover won’t be enough to deter this readership.
Thank you for this post. It’s good to keep on the news for the genres that I don’t keep up with.
don’t even get me started on sookie stackhouse and the twilight series. The whole idea of being sexually attracted to a vampire when part of the attraction is that at any minute he could eat you/ rip you apart is really violent and masochistic. the female characters enjoy the fear and constant threat of violence.
[...] the wispy in-the-throes-of-love facial expressions. You may be interested in reading the post fromThe Anti-Room, where this gem of an ad was first [...]
I had a brief (very) period in my late teens when I was enamored of bodice-rippers. This ended abruptly when I realized that, aside from the nationality and names of the principal characters, the plots are basically interchangeable, the men stupid and the women stupider. Haven’t even looked at the cover of one again until this one. This is just plain disturbing. It reminds me a bit of the current craze for vampire lovers – blood = love and passion. I’m fairly certain that if you put the “heroes” and heroines of these novels into 18th century garb they would be just as vapid as those in the books I remember.
C Murray, I don’t know the author or stories you’ve mentioned, but thanks for getting the link.
Laborious Living, I don’t know the first title you’ve cited but I have read Nin’s Delta of Venus. I’m guessing she set the tone for erotica fiction. I’m not well read in the genre by any means, but I’m not setting out to tell women they shouldn’t like or read it, that’s a matter of personal taste.
Jammin Jabber, I think you’re on to something there. I’ve never watched Nip Tuck but I do recall how they conflated sexual and violent images in their ad campaign. Good call.
Noor, yep I think JJ traced it to the correct inspiration or model.
Anna, thanks for the recs. I’ve never read the genre partly because there’s a great snobbery around it. Now, I hate snobbery, so there’s really no excuse. I’d never say women shouldn’t read romances.
Amanda Halfpenny, yep, you’re right to make them available, depriving women of Harlequin books would be mean spirited.
And yay for you. Librarians are rock stars.
Dreamingalyce, I don’t want to make women feel bad for reading them. My point was at Feministing the post was devoted to how toxic the books are, therefore the argument follows that women shouldn’t read them. Women have every right to read what they like.
Digital Dame, hee, very funny! That sounds like a marketing strategy from hell.
Hi Megan,
Everyone knows Angela Carter , they just think she is Neil Jordan!
She subverted the Fairy-Tale structure and created the most
wonderful imagery, indeed if you liked ‘The Company of wolves’,
wherein dear grandma Angela Landsbury’s head turned to porcelain
and smashed – you’ll know Carter !!!
She wrote the story upon which jordan made his fame!!!
She also (I believe wrote the screenplay for that Movie,
but women get forgotten and lost amongst the shelves,
which is a terrible and shameful pity.
Angela died leaving a huge undeveloped opus and was one of
the first writers to comment on the salman Rushdie Fatwa, indeed
she said ‘Fck the Fatwa’ and invited him to tea in her dying.
She is a loss to literature and the bane of the Politically correct
mob, which is why I adore her and read her lots.
Get the movie and enjoy her book of dark fairytales- if ye dare!
A horrible image with a horrible message. Violence against women or the insinuation thereof cannot be ‘blended’ with cruddy notions of romance or ‘thriller’. Would you put razor blades on your cheese and toast and eat it? It’s detestable, distressing, and dreadful of Harlequin to market this new shit collection as something women might enjoy. Do murders happen in the stories or do we know? Based on the image alone, they’ve confused sexy with snuff.
Hahaha, I like the ad. I looked similarly hot right after I had surgery on my neck.
But yeah, all kidding aside. I don’t really want a romance (or read about one) where there is a chance my head may get cut off.
Phew.
Two parts.
Sylvia, it is a super creepy ad.
Pandabox, this is an ad for the Mira line of books, not an individual cover. Harlequin markets books for a female audience, those other authors you mention write for a general thriller/mystery audience. And I love the Sookie Stackhouse novels.
Covertgroup, I’m not sure flipping the order of domination will necessarily help women out, nor do I think that reverse objectification is a desirable thing. But I get your drift, you wanna see a break with convention. Charlaine Harris’ novels do that. There’s sex and violence but women aren’t doormats or even the victim in each case. Sookie is a moral agent.
Tomcat, thanks, that’s nice to hear. Yep, that sounds pretty obvious but lots of genres do that. Horror and crime fiction do that with titles as well.
Notes fromWumbly & Anwa, I know, it’s horrible. Maybe a nice dose of I can Haz Cheezburger will blot it out.
Whuffie, I liked that Sookie doesn’t get bitten until Bill has her consent, a nice turn on the genre. We llive in a rape culture so there’s no surprise that it turns up in so much fantasy.
Instinctive Mom, we live in patriarchy, not a feministic sociiety.
Louisianefille, good point. They should think how many potential readers they turn off their brand completely with this sort of campaign.
Thanks, Kate. I didn’t know much about the company until I saw the ad.
Bow, I’ve read all 10 of the Sookie books. I think they are fab.
Bookeditors, I’m one of those vampire lovers. Well, only the type that have sex. That Mormon lady’s books seem joyless and grim to me.
June, it’s like a smack in the face to their readership. Boo hiss!
Melissa, ouch for you.
Yeah, not cool.
There are a lot of good romance authors out there who write wonderful stories about two people in a monogamous relationship trying their best in hard circumstances to make it work. Sounds boring? Don’t think so – check out Julia Quinn, Eloisa James, Teresa Medeiros, Donna Kauffmann, Julie Anne Long, Debbie MaComber, etc. Some romances are very sweet, some are extremely steamy, but they have a great story that appeals to readers who aren’t interested in graphic sex and violence. There are many kinds of sub-genres of romance that appeal to readers, and we shouldn’t put down the whole genre just because of one add.
Megan,
True, my use of ‘feministic society’ was not the correct usage. I should have said, “feminisim-influenced women in today’s society’, but it’s silly to argue semantics just to avoid the point I was making.
In the interests of conversation, I would be interested in hearing your rebuttal to any of the other statements I made.
~h
Thanks for posting this!
(yes, appropriately horrified)
Megan McGerk, I enjoyed reading your post. You brought up many valid points.
Megan, yes but part of their sex life is her getting bitten which is also painful for her. hence sex and violence being one of the same. The vampires also feeding on people who are screaming in pain covered in blood is similar to a sexual thrill, its described using the same language.
I’d also agree with jamminjabber. Looks like a nip tuck ad. Besides, maybe he isn’t “installing” the sutures. The look on her face could also be one telling us the viewers that when she turns around to face the mister, she’ll be making him over into HER likeness. At least that zombie wears lipstick.
I work at an crime victim service agency. We see women who were victims of sexual violence on a daily basis. For the most part they feel society blames them for the assault; they way they were dressed, what they were drinking, the crowd they were with, etc. Pop culture media such as this no doubt inforce that perception. No one deserve abuse and the victim receives no pleasure from it.
Thanks for sharing your views. Very well written.
http://www.4girlsblog.wordpress.com
Kelliejwin, I’m not putting down the romance–or any genre. I’d rather folks read anything than not.
Thanks for your recs.
Instinctive Mom, I would disagree when you say that women aren’t allowed to be weak. In the gender binary culture maintains, women are always already supposed to be passive, submissive, weak. When women trangress this code, they are de-sexed wannabes who are deemed harridans, monsters, she-hags. There is no model of domination for women to occupy in patriarchy unless it’s the dominatrix variety and that doesn’t extend beyond the bedroom or sexual play. Now women can turn to books and the imagination for this, indeed, but it’s no surprise that the books that sell the most are those that offer only limited roles for women. What you dismiss as ‘semantics’ is actually the model of domination for the sum of human civilisation.
Panvega, happy to do it. Cheers.
Thanks, Kathy Rowland.
Bow, Charlaine Harris explains in her books that vampire saliva is laced with a sedative so that the pain is numbed when folks are bitten. The way they talk about it, it’s pleasureful to get bitten which only makes sense if you want people to offer themselves up. Sookie’s not a masochist. Also, the sex she has with Bill and more especially Eric was mind-bendingly orgasmic. Don’t confuse what you see on the televison programme with what happens in the books. Totally different.
Cinnamon, he’s holding the ends up in his hands. He’s in control, not the seated lady.
My Blessed West, yep the ‘asking for it’ argument or rationale holds tremendous sway in accounts of violence against women. People will bend over backwards to justify it, say she had it coming.
Pasting this again:
I see the violence of the image but also the macabre as ‘fairy-tale’, for which the best in the genre (Literary) is Carter.
In saying that the image is unrelentingly vicious or violent,
are we not denying the fact (unanswered by the OP)
that this is a cheap marketted product based in
what some women want ?
OR
“One shining aperçu that emerges from its pages to spread light through the stories of The Bloody Chamber is that passivity is never a virtue, in fact, even – especially not – in women. “Justine marks the start of a kind of self-regarding female masochism, a woman with no place in the world, no status, the core of whose resistance has been eaten away by self-pity,” wrote Carter, tracing the descendants of De Sade’s heroine Justine down to Marilyn Monroe. Another passage might have been written specifically as an epigraph for The Bloody Chamber: To be the object of desire is to be defined in the passive case. To exist in the passive case is to die in the passive case – that is, to be killed. This is the moral of the fairy tale about the perfect woman. ”
as long as fiction/literature remains just that, is it
not possible for us to see it for what it is- (assuming
the market-drive was created by women for an audience)
= an unreal and rather weird fantasy-item ?
(wholly based in archetype)
link here :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2006/jun/24/classics.angelacarter
Very disturbing indeed. Nothing says love like an autopsy ‘necklace.’
Wow. Agreed. Very creepy photo and an offensive product. I have always felt Harlequin books classify as “the poor woman’s porn”.
Thanks to our 24/7 digital overload, we are living in a day and age when the book buying trend in general is taking a serious nose dive. I guess Harlequin is ready to try anything to drum up a little more business – the disturbing thing is that anyone would actually want to keep buying and reading this mind-numbing drivel! I would have liked to say “no one”, but at least one of your commenters – combined with the publishing house stats – has nixed that theory. So, your post illustrates a perfect example of how the boundaries of sex and violence keep being grayed, pushed, escalated and ultimately tolerated in our society.
A Great article. Hopefully you’ve raised the awareness a little bit, and/or helped a few rethink what they choose to spend their money and time supporting.
Congrats on being “Freshly Pressed” today!
Cheers – MoSop
P.S. Just for the record, I totally agree “that Mormon Lady’s [vampire] books are joyless and grim”. . . and THIS Mormon lady is extremely disappointed THAT lady can’t just be known as “Stephanie Meyer” OR “the novice writer / poor housewife / gal from Arizona / woman who thinks all teenagers should be helpless, pale, & shirtless / . . . who’s now a multi-millionaire”
The image would be creepy and disturbing if it were the cover of a romance novel. However, the publisher does put out a line of thriller novels. The thriller genre often crosses over into the genre of terror or even horror, hence the cover seems to fit the genre appropriately.
That said, one could take issue with any artwork that depicts any form of implied or actual violence against women (or anyone).
In my own case, I do enjoy works of horror (especially well thought out horror, such as in Lovecraft or Machen). But, I prefer works that are free of “romantic” or sexual elements. As a matter of personal and moral preference, I do not like to blend the two when reading or watching a movie/tv show.
However, I do think that a case can be made for the aesthetic legitimacy of such approaches and, as has been pointed out, they do seem to appeal to a significant number of people (not that crowd appeal entails that something is actually good). Following Wilde, perhaps books are neither good nor evil-just well or poorly written. Or, perhaps Plato is right about the corruptive powers of tragedy, comedy, violence and lust.
but the consumers of this product are women , are we saying that we do not trust the woman consumer to
know the difference between fantasy and reality?
I hope not.
The fact that they consistently buy it and it appears to be a popular imprint (though I’d never heard of it until today)
suggests that it is what some girls want.
are we to patronise or dismiss something that we do not get or like ‘cos it discomfits?
I think mostly those of us with stitches can tell the diff between a constructed bit of macabre-porno and
the reality of what bruising etcetera look like-
should we deny, then, what some people find entertaining?
I mean some people bought the reverse crapology in the Cecilia Ahern opus – so what do we do, take the books
off ‘em and say ” nope, you cannot read yer
fantasy shyte”?
I wouldn’t bother me royal Irish arse buying it BTW
Jala, sorry to skip you. Thanks for reading!
C Murray, sorry, I don’t know Carter and haven’t seen “Company of Wolves.” Don’t know how I missed it. Women may have fantasies about being butchered and killed, yet that doesn’t make it ethical for a company to exploit that in promotion of a line of books for women. Is this the best they can say about their audience? It’s on par with the Jimmy Choo ads where that record label guy is about to bury the woman splayed out in the trunk of his car. Awful.
ES, darn, ‘autopsy necklace’ should have been the title of this post. Way to get to the point!
Mormon Soprano, fair enough. It’s a lazy way to refer to the author. I could have just cited her by name.
Michael, the image is not a book cover. The advertisement promotes violence against women to sell a line of books to women, and to me, that stinks. I have no problem with any genre of fiction. People should read as much, as broadly, as often as they can manage. My focus here was on the ad campaign,not the books themselves, since for starters, I haven’t read the Harlequin books. Harlequin is however disrespecting their audience by sexing up a woman having her throat torn out.
I think it’s a bad call on the part of BDDP Unlimited, Paris, France. I believe the ad firm wants the reader to know that diamonds are actually around the woman’s neck but what the reader actually sees on the cover are sutures through the eyes of the killer. Doesn’t work for me…I think of a jazzed up ad for cosmetic surgery: hey, you can have the kindest cut in the morning at our private hospital and by the evening you can go out dancing in your finest with diamonds and pearls to mark the happy occasion. I believe Harlequin is going down the wrong road on this one.
C Murray, the female audience was not the focus of my post. I’m not telling women what to read.
I’m saying it’s an insulting way for Harlequin to address their audience, women who have shelled out huge sums of money to buy their books over the decades. Their readership deserves more respect, more than a sliced throat.
Geotravel, yep, it’s the wrong road. There’s no evidence that this image is slated for a book cover, though. Only the ad, which is bad enough.
I didn’t notice that it wasn’t a gold necklace until you pointed it out. That image is absolutely creepy. And what woman in her right mind would enjoy that? *shivers*
The heroine and hero entwined announce ‘There Will Be Sex’ for the lady in the library or bookshop?
A point to consider.
You are obviously someone who has never read a romance novel. I regularly read Harlequins and it’s pretty rare that the women are submissive. Perhaps it’s the imprint I read, but that’s been my experience.
And as to this new imprint? The romance novel industry regularly does market research to find what readers want. Recently readers have said that they love, love, love romance novels with suspense and mystery. This line seems to be a new one devoted exclusively to murder mystery romance novels. My guess is these novels are more like one of the CSI episodes where Grisham and Sarah were seeing each other. Only you get to see the sex scenes. And what’s so bad about that?
Also I thought I’d add that the market research shows that an overwhelming majority of romance readers went to college. They are not the uneducated, poor white trash that many people assume them to be.
[...] Sexism is bad enough, but sexualized violence against women is a squick-out. See, for example, Harlequin. There are so many examples of book covers that are horrible like this, and it bothers me [...]
@Bow: I don’t think that’s what the Sookie Stackhouse novels are about, at all. Sookie is attracted to vampires because she can’t read their minds and they give her peace and quiet. She doesn’t moon around fantasizing about them ripping her to shreds.
As far as the ad goes, I don’t find it in the least offensive. I think it suggests that some scary stuff is going to go down with that woman and she doesn’t know it yet (hence why she looks happyish), and that the man she might love is probably not who she thinks he is. I think it is meant to intrigue people to find out who she is, who he is, and what happens. I don’t think it in any way implies that women should expect to be treated like that or that it’s sexy to do violence to women.
These aren’t just romances, they’re thrillers–in the romance world, that means dead women, because that’s more scary to women than dead guys. It doesn’t give the impression that she’s aware of her current predicament, so one can’t really say that it makes violence “sexy,” as though they purposely set the mood for it or even acquiesced; at the time of the violence in the books proper, no sex may be taking place at all. When the violent parts are written, the tone might be all terror and zero sexy. The sex is the romance part and the violence, or fear of violence, is the thriller part. After all, getting all dolled up for the man of your dreams and finding out that he’s a psychopathic killer is pretty damned terrifying.
The girl looks sexy and she seems like she’s manipulative and cunning with that look. And Harlequin is sexy. And she proves sutures can be sexy if that’s your thing.
This cover is very disturbing.
For exploring the theme of sex and gender and sex (intercourse) in romances, I recommend Janice Radway’s Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy and Popular Culture (http://www.amazon.com/Reading-Romance-Patriarchy-Popular-Literature/dp/0807843490). The research was done in the 1990s, but a lot of the same principles apply.
From my perspective, Harlequin has been a long running candy that will never spoil to quench the thirst of women who long for these type of innuendos, or suggestive thoughts. My mother in law has a complete library of these books that she has collected over a period of at least 30 years.
Currently, I am bucking the trend trying to teach my boys to treat women with the utmost respect that they deserve. In no way shape or form am I trying to be disrespectful towards women. All I am trying to accomplish is to raise my boys the correct way without prejudice.
But before they can judge what they read, they must learn to read to begin with. That is why my blog is dedicated to teach children how to read. Since knowledge is power, then teaching a child how to read is the ultimate gift. So as a parent, we must be responsible for our children’s up bringing one child at a time. Fortunately, I have discovered a great teacher. If this peaks your interest, then come over to my blog at http://dezigner356.wordpress.com
not sure when it happened, but Harlequin are no longer a publisher in the true sense. They are instead a Vanity Press – that is, if you pay US $599 you too can be a published Harlequin author.
Source : http://www.teddypig.com/2009/11/reader-beware-harlequin-becomes-a-vanity-press/
I also saw a writer for Harlequin saying that she had no choice over the cover, but the main image came from the imprint’s library of stock images, and had been used many years ago on one of her favourite romances, when Harlequin were actually a publisher.
Glad to see some is thinking. Thanks for the thoughtful post.
Here is a link to more MIRA books… absolutely terrifying!
http://www.eharlequin.com/store.html;jsessionid=EFA3B16910B85FACCEB192AE492B978C?cid=242
I’ve been reading Harlequin books for years and I haven’t read one yet where anyone was raped.
Did you do any research at all? Even if what you claim is true, different strokes for different folks, I say.
Sandra, Feministing made the argument that they featured rape. I merely responded to their position, saying it probably didn’t appear as rape to readers.
Even if what I claim is true it’s a matter of different strokes? Really, violence against women is no biggie, just a matter of personal taste.
Now that’s an idea that creeps me out more than this ad.
Like I said, I never read a Harlequin that promoted violence against women. Have you read the books the poster is advertising? How do you know that the book is promoting violence against women?
From that picture, it could even be that a woman was murdered and clearly that is violence against women, but how do you know that the main characters aren’t actually on a hunt to find her murderer and avenge the murder?
OK, I guess take what I say with a grain of salt. I didn’t realize the Feminsting article was clicky and I didn’t read it. I was just going off the image of the poster.
Wow.That’s great.
The ad is very disturbing to say the least and conjures up images of serial killers like Ted Bundy or Jack the Ripper. Glorified violence in any form is simply wrong.
” This crap isn’t sexy, it’s only a ham-fisted attempt to sexualise violence against women.”
i see it as well.
[...] dejar un comentario » The closest I’ve come to a Harlequin romance was a decade ago when I was running a book sale to finance a graduate student association, which I had the unfortunate position of getting elected president to, in a stunning illustration of the sagacity of Oscar Wilde’s observation that the only thing worse than not getting what you want is getting what you want. One member brought in more than two dozen titles from the Harlequin series for our fundr … Read More [...]
Crazy cover. Good insights.
I have to confess, yesterday I bought my first Harlequin book ever – partly because I didn’t realise what it was. The Australian edition’s cover is cleverly disguised to not look like a romance! Oh, the shame! (Still, it looks like a good story so I’ll give it a shot!)
Wow oh wow @ the stiches that appeared to be a necklace.
This blog has tond of interesting things to read as well as many authors with something different to offer.
unique reads are great
Can’t agree more with what you wrote here! Shame on the ad.
I. Am. So. Creeped.
I don’t read romance unless there’s more suspense than romance simply because the books don’t interest me. But have you ever bothered to read a Harlequin book? They’re not all about violence against women. I know a couple authors who have published with the line in the last year and none of their books have rape scenes in them. Giving a broad generalization that all books from the publisher are that way is ignorance personified.
Tay, take a look at my post again. The link to feministing is where they make the argument that the Harlequin books are full of sexualised violence. My point is even if there is rape in it, the audience probably doesn’t understand it as such.
I admit that I’ve never read them and only respond to a mainstream feminist blog’s objection with the books.
Not reading a post before you respond to it is ignorance personified, if we’re going to get all bitchy about it.
Did it ever occur to you that this isn’t some agenda society has but instead a manifestation of the desires of women. By publishing it society isn’t creating it they simply just aren’t repressing it.
So you’re saying it’s not a matter of global, historical patriarchy subjugating women to subhuman status, but a case of the ladies liking to be tortured and killed.
That is so messed up, Vasafaxa.
It’s too simple to put the “blame” on society. Too easy. it’s even too easy to say that there is some kind of big blame. Life isn’t black and white, evil and good. The human psyche is a twisted, place in men and women.
Sure there is a lot of opression in the world. But to be honest growing up in the USA I haven’t felt a lot of it. I’ve lived a nice upscale middleclass life. My experience is going to be different than a woman beaten and opressed. My fantasies will be different, so will other women’s.
It’s just too easy to play the good, evil card here. Life isn’t that simple and it discounts an important part of the human psyche. Many women have rape fantasies few act them out, but many women enjoy reading about them.
This doesn’t mean that rape is right. The same way that many men like to play violent video games. This doesn’t mean violence is right.
It’s impossible to sterilize the human mind male or female and is silly to try.
Combat real oppression, sure. But first be sure that you account for all factors and don’t just pin all the blame on some kind of ghost in the machine Patriarchy.
Well said.
(And pardon me for going off on a rant that arguably goes further than warranted in context.)
Being from Sweden (the most gender-feministic country in the world), I am fed up with this constant talk about the Jewish cons… sorry, the Patriarchy, denials of biological differences between men and women, attempts to bring any question to some variation of poor oppressed women and bastard men, etc. This, in particular, as the claims made are often just baseless rhetoric and/or contradicted by the actual proofs at hand. (Cf. e.g. a recent discussion of a gender-feminist’s statements.)
Yes, oppression of women does occur—but so does oppression of men. Any discussion that is based pseudo-scientific premises like the Patriarchy is likely to be unproductive, possibly even harmful. Look at the actual facts at hand and investigate the why and wherefore with an unbiased mind. Do not put on the reality distorting Swedish “genusglasögon” /“gender-(eye-)glasses”, but view the world as it actually is.
Ruth Ann, I almost scanned over it as well until I thought what the heck am I missing here? It’s like they say what good is beauty if it only gets you killed?
‘nBasis, women readers know when they pick up a Harlequin there will be sexy scenes inside. And again, there’s nothing wrong with that.
Michael, The Anti Room has loads of points to consider.
Mandy, submission for women is everywhere. I doubt that the romance genre is somehow magically free of gender norms in patriarchy.
Greengeekgirl, trust me, no woman is capable of looking so composed and pretty when she’s had her throat slit. And I’m also not telling you to be offended. I’m telling Harlequin that they disrespect their readership.
Pandelicious, your comment disturbs me more than the ad. Getting your throat slashed and wearing a string of sutures is hardly any woman’s ‘thing’ like wearing all black or floral accessories. Mostly because they’re dead when this happens.
Get your head out of your butt.
Odorunara, thanks for the rec. That sounds right up my alley.
Dezigner, Harlequin’s just escapist fantasy. Women can read it if they like.
Sting in the Tail, they do more than just the fantasy press. Their publishing empire is the largest in Canada. And again, this isn’t a book cover. It’s an ad for the Mira line of books.
Sarah & Oasis: cheers!
Nancy, good call. A whole lot of serial killers come to mind with this one.
Rolf, hard to miss, isn’t it?
Fikalo, don’t feel bad! You should read what you like. My point about no one buying them in the book sale is that there’s so much snobbery levelled against women who read them because it’s painted with the pink brush of femme-dom. Anything women like gets dismissed. You should not let that make you feel bad. I’ve been shamed for buying the Sookie books and I say “screw you, buddy.”
Webmistress, Willie, Breadtobeaten: thanks.
I do not think that the article or comments begin to understand why Harlequins are popular with women or the incidence of rape and abuse among women. It is always difficult to comprehend that large numbers of men are raped or sexuallyabused. Research establishes a n abuse ratio of men to women of 4:10. So there are women with a distorted and unpleasant sexuality- and they read books. I don’t think that many read my books.
Great article! The picture is quite disturbing, I wouldn’t have noticed it hadn’t it been pointed out.
I don’t think we can ever fully understand why some women love reading books in which they exhibit submissive behavior. As an English Literature major, I unfortunately read books nowadays and see phallic symbols everywhere, and I’m critical of every man/woman relationship and how the rule of the Father, patriarchy, oozes out of so many books! However, I don’t think the world is overwhelmed with critical readers who are insulted by what the publishing world is giving us as “literature”. I honestly don’t know who to blame.
huh
I love your stuff! Keep on going and good luck!!!
Markus from Europe
Though I belive it’s toward the bad side of “romance” novels, I don’t think there is actuallya complete problem with these types of storylines. I mean, those who like these kinds of plots obviously enjoy them for what they are. No one is really imposing these ideas on them. What should be done is women are educated on the fact that abusive relationships are, of course, bad and how the media intertwines the idea ofthis being “sexy”. If people know this, as long as there are enough fans, they should be allowed to be able to read what they like. Verity never hurt a person.
Charlie, thanks for reminding me that it’s always about the men and that women are psychologically flawed. It had been a whole five minutes so I had forgotten.
Dimamatta, why, it’s patriarchy you need to blame. I have a Ph.D. in English and know full well that you have been fed a steady diet of The Male Point of View from the great books. Balance out your reading and you’ll be fine.
Fightforthewrite, hope you’re mulling.
Mina, I’m not advocating what women should be reading. My beef is with the publisher.
My Mom is a big romance reader, she’s been reading them ever since I was a kid. I remember going through her bedroom and she’d have like hundreds of them stuffed underneath her bed. I say the picture kinda looks like Nip Tuck too, and I thought it looked kind of strange for a necklace…
Thanks Megan for reminding me of this…i got carried away! But one never knows and perhaps for many readers of this particular “ad” the actual venue may meld with cover art. Harlequin began in Canada 1949. Mills & Boon long before 1949. Harlequin Enterprises owns Mills & Boon. I believe harlequin is heavy into funding many “good works” organizations and especially those good works that directly benefit women.
I know it is off topic…but here is a link that addresses some of the issues of writing for Harlequin. http://bit.ly/4WsQX6
[...] ad, MIRA, prejudice, sexism, sexism in advertising, sexism in the media, sexist 0 I was reading a blog yesterday that was discussing Harlequin’s new ad for their thriller/romance line Mira. This is the ad: [...]
Very interesting point of view. I would not have drawn those conclusions from the b ook cover, to me it IS just a pretty woman getting a necklace as a gift. I do not have anything against Mills&Boon or inedn Harlequin, except that I just finid them so profoundly un-interesting. I tried reading a few but had to stop as they were zapping my life- force.
I think if we are going to play the blame game on anyone, it shouldn’t really be one person. Someone wrote that story and the other made its public. I’m not really here to say what people’s opinions, I’m just saying that people should understand the aspects of what they are reading exactly.
Megan
Sarcasm is not in itself an argument. If you are a male and abused in a fiction or in real life – which is very common indeed – it is not a joke or sexist to remind people from time to time of the fact. Tell me what is it that reminds people to ignore it or write about it?
i can’t bear to look at that picture..it’s just awful.
‘People should understand what they are reading exactly.’ Well that is impossible? No one can be expected to understand their reading matter exactly, otherwise fiction would be pointless. In the UK it is not possible to advertise products with men ogling suggestively at attractive women in work situations – for obviously good reasons – but it is possible to do the reverse, women ogling men. What conclusions might we draw from that?