We had well over 3,000 votes in the first two rounds of this poll – wow! We knew you all were passionate about romance, but wow! We’ve now taken the top 150 books from both rounds and presented them here. This combines the starter nominations provided in Round One and the write-ins from Round Two and we ask you to vote for as many in this top 150 as you like. Every book you think belongs on a Reader Poll Top 100, tick that box!
From this, we’ll take the Top 100 and that will be our list. We’ll give you all one more chance to decide the ranking of the top 10 in the next round (Four), but this round is what determines the overall list. So, please – share it far and wide!
@chrisreader – In your last paragraph you suggest that I personally want authors removed. I do not, though that sentiment may have been expressed by others. I think instead racist/sexist authors, just as an example, should be publicly critiqued rather than silenced. I find open and respectful conversations about these issues potentially productive and removal just a band-aid on a much bigger problem in our country. Removal of “words’? Again, no. Instead, I am a big advocate for critiquing language. Important distinctions here.
As far as the issue of diversity, some readers mistakenly, in my opinion, blame the “methodology” of the poll for the low numbers of people of color and authors of color represented. The anger over diversity and representation, however, has been clearly present in nearly all of the debates over the past weeks. I was going to try to explain one more time right here why readers are angry, but I have written several times over the past two weeks and, more importantly, many others who feel their realities are under-represented have written. We have all had access to these ideas and so the writings are all above for anyone willing to listen.
I think this might be the best method to cover the middle ground between satisfying Grifffina’s desire for a more questioning attitude toward racist/sexist authors and the owner’s desire for full freedom of expression, Blackjack.
I don’t really see it as an anger over diversity or representation – but maybe a frustration from others who don’t understand why a poll that was completely open to adding any book or author in the genre in the first round was misinterpreted. Voters are angry that they weren’t given diverse examples to go by, and site users are frustrated because other voters aren’t using their voting power to help move change with them.
I personally voted diversely, deliberately so and nominated that way as well, but if others don’t show up to back up my votes they won’t and don’t make a dent in the face of a three thousand person monolith. That’s the big problem – people have to show up and vote in the poll instead of boycotting it. If you boycott the poll, the voice of the people becomes even less diverse. I still think organization is key.
Perfectly stated, Anon, and I completely agree! I can see some important steps that need to take place, and I actually have seen AAR make these steps in recent years. More authors of color are being reviewed and more books populated by characters of color are being reviewed. More non cis-gendered books are being reviewed. All of this potentially creates interest and access, and very importantly, ligitimacy, for readers who only see whiteness/heterosexuality/patriarchy etc. in their entertainment choices. I have also said this a few times here in this forum, but I’ll repeat: a comparison between 2013’s AAR Top Reader Poll and this 2018 AAR Top Reader Poll indicates to me that changes are taking place. That doesn’t mean readers who are concerned or frustrated or angry for exclusion should be satisfied, and I do not in any way want to diminish their feelings, but I do see some progress.
So, in the hopes of moving the conversation to a more productive place, let me just say that I had the great pleasure of reading a wonderful, biracial romance, Eleanor & Park, just days ago after seeing the title appear here on the AAR voters’ list. I had heard of Rainbow Rowell but had not ever read any of her books. If the book had not shown up here on this list, I may not have ever found my way to it. It reminded me once again of the importance of diversity in books. It’s just an absolutely lovely romance and one with important things to say about race and gender in contemporary America. I wish I could go back and vote for it, but since I had already voted, I’m crossing my fingers and toes it makes it to the Top 100. I couldn’t find a review of it here on this site but if there isn’t one, I hope someone can review it.
Indeed, progress is coming, slowly but surely.
Actually, I found Eleanor and Park to be rather racist, with an almost fetishized portrait of the lead male character. Just my opinion!
I don’t think readers’ criticism of the poll results should be dismissed as “silly” or delegitimized as ineffective “complaining”/whining, particularly with regard to underrepresentation of AOC. Because representation matters. Especially when the leader of our nation has made clearer than ever that he doesn’t consider some POC human. I think it’s a completely valid emotion to be unhappy with the disproportionate lack of AOC in the lists, and to express that dissatisfication. Please don’t devalue readers’ reactions to the poll, especially if they have self-identified as marginalized and you have more privilege. If you feel their reactions are irrational or unfair, please try considering the situation from their perspective and at least acknowledge the validity of their emotions.
I understand one of the main arguments against my POV is the assertion that reader choice must be accurately represented, even if that means keeping votes for openly racist authors who harmfully represent POC in their books. I hope we can at least agree that this is not a completely innocent position to defend, even if it’s believed to be the “right” one in order to preserve the accuracy of reader votes. Because it privileges a large number of readers who are fortunate enough not to feel harmed by racist writers, over marginalized readers who do feel harmed seeing such writers showcased.
Lastly, I’m not completely sure how closely this poll really represents what romance readers in general believe. More than 3000 people participated, but there are millions of romance fans, and this is not a statistically random sampling of reader choice. At the same time, I don’t think readers who are critical of the poll results should be dismissed as “silly” for taking issue with a poll that’s just supposed to be fun, when so few AOC have been on the list in any of the rounds.
I agree on the repeated use of the word “silly” from a handful of readers here. It is absolutely valid to examine poll results and try to come to some conclusions/observations about them. If whiteness is over-represented here, and it is, it is definitely worth noting that AAR readers who voted did so overwhelmingly for white, hetero authors and mainly for stories about white hetero characters. That is a fact. Now, what do we collectively interpret from that fact? The marginalizing of race in our entertainment choices, whether done consciously or not, can tell us that racial divides remain in place in the romance reading community. More reviews from authors of color and more stories about people of color, biracial characters, and interracial love stories can over time impact how readers feel about those books as legitimate, “entertaining” choices. I have found though that since the last poll more books representing diversity are being reviewed here, and so I feel that there has been a step in the right direction, Same is true LGBTQ books.
I’m also not at all persuaded by the “people like what they like” argument and find that at best an example of circular logic (i.e. logical fallacy). There is no evidence to prove it other than to keep saying that people like what they like because they like what they like because…. On the contrary, I would argue that people like what they like for very complex personal AND social reasons. There is so much evidence indicating that people absorb important social values and cues from reading, and that reading (and any art form), is indicative of cultural customs. Maybe readers don’t have access to diversity in their reading materials. But if that’s the case, that too is important because it shows us that access issues continue to perpetuate whiteness as a standard.
And I guess too that when people find the discussion about race or sexual orientation or gender equality silly, that may be the time to just sit back and listen. More people have posted about this poll than I’ve seen in years here at this site. People obviously have concerns and insights to share. Nothing silly about that.
We will release the top 100 later this weekend. It’s an interesting list.
Since you have jumped on Griffina’s bandwagon of selecting words from what I post and willfully misrepresenting them make your own arguments I will repost what was actually posted above.
**I think its silly for people….to come here angry at AAR because the average reader isn’t exposed to the most diverse material and the newest publications.”
No one said examining the results, being unhappy with the results or looking for more diversity was “silly”. Beating up AAR and the pollsters with a lot of negative and sometimes nasty comments is because you are unhappy with how OTHER PEOPLE VOTED.
Also “silly”: cherry picking words at random and misquoting people when you don’t agree with what they post.
I stand by my post. I do not think that the word “silly” is appropriate in this conversation when aimed at readers who have a right to be upset over the lack of diversity in the romance reading community. That is a legitimate conversation to have and an important one too, and that is the conversation I hope we continue to have going forward.
You are clearly being deliberately obtuse and dishonest in your post but if you want to “stand by it” that’s fine.
Silly was referring to people rudely lashing out at AAR because they don’t like how other people voted, -something AAR has zero control over unless people expect AAR to dishonestly tamper with peoples votes.
Nothing was ever posted about people not having a right to be unhappy with the voting. Griffina (yet again) took words out of context and you happily jumped on the bandwagon in order to manufacture some kind of controversy. So be it.
I addition to all the authors and books you don’t approve of who AAR should just remove from the voting, you can include a list of vocabulary words that aren’t allowed in the comment section either. That should certainly lend itself to “legitimate” and “important” conversation.
I think it’s worth noting that readers like Chrisreader aren’t official staff nor do they seem to represent AAR’s pov on this poll. I haven’t seen any AAR staff call these feelings ‘silly’.
I also don’t believe any of the final authors have such representations in their books. . Your original argument was about Linda Howard’s inclusion on the list and her real-life racism when it came to her actions within the RWA.
As for the sample size of the audience, I don’t think it’s meant to be a definitive genre-wide list – just one for people who read at the site. It would require at least five million to six million responses to gather a definitive sample size for the millions who read romance. Even the sample size The Ripped Bodice gathered for their diversity in romance poll wasn’t as big as I’d have liked it to be.
I like BJ’s statement above – I hope that readers will continue to be inspired to read diversely. I read, support, nominate and vote diversely. I’m only one person trying to make a difference, but I do what I can.
With respect to Linda Howard, I have not seen racism portrayed in her books, and I have not written about that as others have here. I am though aware of the Twitter feuds between her and other romance writers on this issue. Here on AAR, I have instead written quite a bit about Howard’s ugly depictions of a transgender character in Mr. Perfect and, in my opinion, her troubling depictions of non-consensual sexual acts in other books such as Mackenzie’s Mountain or After the Night. Again though, I am not advocating for Howard’s removal as others have. I instead firmly believe that any author’s public fictional representations are subject to an open debate and examination.
AAR’s Maggie used the word “silly.”
And yes, BJ’s post was wonderful. The responses to it were disappointing though, as I do not believe that “people just like what they like” provides an accurate understanding of why readers embrace some forms of entertainment over others.
I didn’t recall the transphobia in Mr. Perfect but yes, I definitely recalled the forced seduction scenes in most of her books.
I will take Maggie’s comment in the spirit of the early-post controversy (about the poll not bein genre encompassing enough) being silly versus the diversity discussion that had happened in the previous two posts on Twitter and over the past couple of days. The NPR list comparisons are actually silly and the only silly part of the conversation.
Oh. Lorraine heath my favourite. Didn’t make it.
Upset that none of Johanna Lindsey’s books are on here!!
Well while the start of Meljean Brooks series made the list (“The Iron Duke”) I can’t believe “The Kraken King” did not make it since IMHO it was the best romance of the whole series (and one of my All Time Top 5 Romances) but the fact it was released in serial format first then as a whole novel might have had some effect on it.
Douglas C. Meeks
Amazon Top 500 VINE Reviewer, Goodreads Top 1% Reviewer, Reviewer for Paranormal Romance Guild, Wicked Scribes and Kindle Book Review
via GIPHY
I would like to echo Bona and Frances. Thanks to all who have worked to produce this list for readers to vote on. AAR stated from the beginning that no poll would be perfect. NPR’s top books counted a series as one choice, so actually had way more than 100 books. This poll will be a great way to find new books to investigate. Thomas, Long and Bourne are auto buys for me, but I’m always on the hunt for more. Again thank you for a job well done!
This is my favourite poll, as it is made by readers and it has been very useful for me for many years, in order to discover books and authors that I now love. So Thank you, than you, thank you.
Yes, some of my favourite authors are not in these 150 books, BUT many of them are here, so I am quite happy. It’s obvious that my personal taste is not very original, as I’ve read 116 books of these last 150. The majority of the remaining 34 books belong to the paranormal subgenre, which I don’t like. But I think I’m going to give them a try, anyway.
Thankyou AAR staffers for all the work you have put in to providing we readers with an opportunity to have our say about which romance books we think are the best.
I think LeeB is correct when she says people vote for their favourite books. We readers don’t think about some theoretical balance of historical vs contemporary vs paranormal romance. We look at the list you initially proposed, check the books on our ereaders and bookshelves and then vote for or nominate those we think are outstanding.
The annual lists staff members and reviewers nominate as the “ best of the year “ are interesting but this reader, for one, appreciates the opportunity to nominate or vote for books I think are worthy of inclusion in a “ best of “ list. It is disappointing when a book/ author I think deserves inclusion doesn’t make the cut but the lively discussion re authors who should or should not have made the cut shows we are all passionate about the world of romance reading.
I look forward to the proposed future discussion about the top romance series. I would be equally interested in reading people’s thoughts regarding the top contemporary romance authors/ books, top sci-fi romance authors/ books, top historical western romance authors/ books etc.
Great comment!
When does the voting close for round 3?
On Friday.
I think the only way to avoid the problem where things that are currently popular aren’t disproportionately represented would be to only allow books on the list if they were published more than five years ago (sort of like the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but counting from the end rather than the beginning), but oy, if they had done it that way, a lot of people would still be pretty upset. I’d be kind of interested to see a poll for authors like that, though, where the author’s first date of publication by some criteria determines eligibility.
The list doesn’t thrill me (cf. above for my woe at the omission of Ivory), but hey, it’s still fascinating to see what made the list, and we picked these ourselves, so. Thanks to all the hard work from the AAR staffers.
Having been a pollster on the last three AAR Top 100 lists and many, many, many AAR annual polls, I have learned that people vote for their favorite books — period. They don’t try to make sure they choose a representative choice of every genre and/or every author. They choose their favorite books. The titles with the most votes rise to the top. That’s it.
Well said, Lee.
You perfectly sum up my view on the voting Lee! Well said.
So many books I adore aren’t on this list – but with 3500+ votes from the diverse readership of romance, that’s to be expected. I will still shout loudly and proudly for books I love – to anyone and everyone who cares to listen.
**And if you’re listening, Helen Hoang’s June debut, The Kissing Quotient, is BRILLIANT.**
I can’t recall the last time I’ve been looking so forward to a book — and a book from a completely new-to-me author!! June can’t get here fast enough.
It’s a good list, but I will admit I was surprised at the amount of Kleypas books. I voted only for one, Devil in Winter. The omission of Jo Beverly was surprising, I loved Devlish and was surprised to see the mediocre Devil in Spring where it IMO should of been.
I appreciate the time and energy put into this project by the volunteers at AAR. I would be curious to know how many commenters voted in the first and second rounds. Thanks for all your hard work!
I’ve voted in every round. I was disappointed with the initial list although I think I understand it’s intent. I was relatively pleased that the second list managed to include several of my older favorites. Thx latest list not so much. But yes I voted anyway.
The first two rounds had about 3500 votes.
When someone brought up the NPR list, I was curious so went to look at it. I very much liked it, but it overcomes several problems that exist in this list from AAR by dividing into genres and by choosing favorite series instead of spreading “votes” among multiple titles by the same author. Thus I don’t think it really “fair” to compare the two lists as the methodology in creating them was so different.
I’m with the several of the commenters here, in that I haven’t read many of the books on this list, and I find it missing quite a few older books that are my favorites (some of which didn’t survive to this round). I’m going to be quite interested to see if any of my votes from this list make the top ten.
I know, as a reviewer at AAR that this poll has been done with the greatest amount of work and integrity you can ask of anyone or group. Reviewers top 10, readers top choices, lists voted on by readers. No shenanigans and no data mining or Cambridge Analytica!
I am disappointed with the list because the majority are heterosexual historical romances. I saw someone complain about KJ Charles being on the list, well thank goodness or there would be no LGBTQ representation or English writers writing English historical romances, with the exception of Austen and Bronte.
KJ Charles quite rightly makes this list as she is a wonderful writer, a very accurate writer and historical researcher. There has been an awful lot of very strong comments on site, twitter / FB about representation, diversity and own voice authors. However, the lists can only show what readers write in and vote for.
So, rather than complaining about the lists, which represent readers’ choices, maybe readers should expand their horizons. Read less American white authors, writing about white straight MCs, in English historical romances instead of moaning when the best of lists are stuffed with them.
Let’s just accept that people love what and whom they will.
Exactly. And even more so, people often tend to read what they know. Or what seems familiar or appealing. I freely admit as I have gotten older I cannot take many 19 year old heroines and find myself eye rolling through more Kristen Ashley novels at times simply because she will often write older heroes and heroines.
To understand in general who the “romance reader” is, I found this very interesting.