There are books, authors, series, and even whole genres that I just can not, no matter how many times I give them a whirl, find interesting. Last year one of my book clubs read A Gentleman in Moscow and everyone but me adored it. I was so bored, I quit at the 500 page mark, miffed I’d wasted precious reading time on such a twee tale. Several friends of mine feel the best book they ever read–EVER!–is A Man Called Ove. I’ve tried to read it three times and every time just… can’t… do… it. That guy is waaaaaay too cranky for me.
So, despite my propensity to love romance novels, there are those that aren’t for me. Shifter stories don’t call to me–I’m always overcome with practical concerns about clothing, food sources, and DNA. I find the appeal of Kristen Ashley’s books somewhat mystifying. I find her heroes to be–in the three books I’ve managed to finish, misogynistic jerks whose manipulative techniques creep me out–and every single one of her heroines seems to live to be called baby. Sugar Daddy and Blue-Eyed Devil, two of the books in Lisa Kleypas’ Travises series, regularly show up on top lists in romance and I found them both a bit of a slog.
My responses to these books are mine and as such they’re not right/wrong/stupid/mean/clueless (no matter what you shifter fans think!). Books, just like people, work for some and not for others and that’s just fine. (So please no scolding readers for their lack of love.)
How ’bout you? What book do you not understand the love for? Are there series or genres that get a hard pass from you? If so, why?
Any book in the antebellum South. If a book has slavery of any kind I can’t read it. If slavery is just mentioned in passing I can deal with that but if any main characters own slaves the book is dead to me. I read one book where the woman was an abolitionist in secret but I only knew because a friend warned me first. She was a slavery supporter to the reader early on! Poor choice by the author.
This also causes me to avoid Westerns. Too many have ex confederate army members explaining how they really weren’t fighting for slavery blah blah blah. It’s a firm throw book in the trash and avoid the author forever thing for me.
I avoid inspirational stories even though I’m fairly religious. I just find them too judgy.
I HATE secret baby stories because I think failing to tell a father he has a child (absent abuse in the relationship) is an unforgivable breach that no man should ever have to forgive. It makes all the romance after that unbelievable. I usually end up feeling disgust for one character and pity for the other.
Otherwise I am game for anything.
No reverse harems, threesomes or anything with more than two people in love. I know that there are people IRL that are in this type of relationship but I’m a firm believer that three (or four) is a crowd. I can’t respect a hero who is okay with passing the heroine around like a cigarette. I also avoid inspirational like the plague. These are two things I can say with confidence I won’t ever read. I also have a list of books I won’t generally read but with the right author, I’ll never say never. I almost never read mafia or MC books. I don’t read much romsus YA and mysteries but I have read and liked some in those subgenres before. I just don’t read them as a rule. I also avoid any daddy kinks and heavy BDSM books but if the right author was to write one I’d probably give it a shot. As far as series, I never cared for JQ The Bridgertons, the Fever or The BDB series. I read a few books in each and promptly lost interest.
Outlander! Omg! First, fore not a romance and not slightly romantic. It bored me to tears. I don’t get it.
I agree, not a romance. But I love it! My favorite book/series EVER!. But lots of folks hate it, too, so you’re in good company.
Awaiting #9 with huge anticipation!
I’m the “never say never” sort. As long as you don’t bore me.
There are some stories I tend to stay away from. So if I read about a book that sounds interesting, and then learn that it’s about another Russian Mafia hero, I might roll my eyes and ignore it. But if it sounds interesting enough in spite of that, I might at least add it to my wish list. Now, it might stay on that wish list for a couple of years… But on the other hand, someday I might try it sooner if I feel the urge.
One book/series I couldn’t read was 50 Shades or Grey (plus the sequels), it’s not because I’m a book snob as I will read anything that entertains me. I read the whole Twilight saga without a problem. It wasn’t too racy and I didn’t care that it started off as fan fiction -I just could not bring myself to wade through the writing. I didn’t make it through a chapter and couldn’t force myself even with the “curiosity” factor and the fact everyone including 60 year old men at work had read it and were talking about it. I was just annoyed with the writing and bored with it.
Regardless of the genre, I can’t do zombies.
The exception is if they show up and are quickly dispatched in a thriling paranormal battle (such as in Yasmine Galenorn’s Otherworld books). I have a hard time with undead creatures in general. I wanted to like Jordan L. Hawke’s Whyborne and Griffin series because it’s so highly praised, the audiobooks are awesome, but the heavy use of people being subsumed by spirits and becoming undead creatures just didn’t work for me.
I avoid vampire novels because they all end with the non-vampire protagonist also becoming immortal. I was excited to try te limited-lifespan vampires of Bec McMaster (who is super beloved around here) but she went the same route and it was very disappointing to me.
What bothers you about the immortality? I think, when well done (Angel) it show that immortality is a curse. When a human lover, though, has to choose, why wouldn’t they choose that curse if it means spending their lives with the one they love. Not all stories have to be as realistic as the choices made in Tuck Everlasting.
What bothers me is that the vast majority (by which I mean I can’t even think of one that doesn’t) of vampire novels play this as a source of conflict: “We can’t be together because I’m an immortal vampire and they’re a human!” You’re just yawning and flipping pages until the twit realizes that they can make their true love a vampire too and GOSH WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THAT COMING.
I don’t know any romance authors who portray immortality as a curse (or at least do so meaningfully, beyond a “boo hoo I outlived my family hey console me pretty lady”). One author who does it very interestingly is Barbara Hambly in Those Who Hunt The Night, where we see aristocrats who have outlived a world that works the way they expect, and vampires grappling with faded, bored ennui. There is a married couple at the core of this story so I can recommend it for romance fans, but vampires are the villains.
Actually in Bec McMaster’s first novel, “Kiss Of Steel” the heroine had a vaccine so she can never become a “blue blood” and her (eventual) husband is already a “blue blood” over 50 years old (but still looking in his 20’s)when they marry. I’ve wondered what will happen over time. Blade can use his blood to help heal her of things but it doesn’t make her younger or stop the aging process that I remember. Almost all the other couples are matched blue blood to blue blood or verwulfen to blue blood or verwulfen. Only Blade and Jasper Lynch are blue bloods married to humans. At some point there has to be a “Highlander” type situation going on when the men never age but their human wives (and children) do.
Steampunk is a NOPE for me.
And NOPE to Navy SEAL “heroes”.
No to inspirational, medieval, cowboys, sheiks, billionaires and I think Dukes are about to join the list.
I don’t enjoy the 21st century ideas and values in the HR novels. Also two many subplots in HR novels are not for me.
It makes me crazy! Why write a HR?
I’ve been following the posts here with great interest. It seems that everyone here has both similar and dissimilar tastes which is as it should be in our funny old world. I agree wholeheartedly, though, with what Caz said about the HEA as this is my prime consideration and the reason I avoid 99% of “literary fiction” and why I question whether novels such as “Gone Girl” are anywhere on the romance scale as the conclusion for me was both repugnant and unbelievable and definitely not an HEA. Verisimilitude is pretty important to me as well and it just didn’t do it for me in GG.
As to what I simply have to avoid: Fantasy, shape shifting, werewolves, vampires, steam punk, motorcycle sagas, most (but not all) sports romances, sci-fi, YA, most (but not all) inspies (Amish stories are interesting sometimes), most dystopia and novels that border on sheer porn, especially those with a menage a trois. I did try a few of Cat Sebastian’s books and she writes well but it’s not something that I am particularly attracted to.
And concerning style, as someone mentioned above the first person, present tense, this is what made me so irritated at Hilary Mantel’s novels: they were just to annoying as they dragged me too far out of my personal comfort zone and I found them hard going.
Finally, I will avoid authors of any genre who have poorly written prose and questionable plot structure accompanied by bad grammar and punctuation and who make repeated (seemingly knowing) mistakes in HR like getting aristocratic titles wrong or who have heroines who are 21st century #metoo girls dressed up in corsets – @#&%!!!
Thanks for Ask @AAR – great fun! And, Mark, lovely to see you commenting again.
Inspired by your list:
Oh, mafia or crime families, too – I find a HEA built on thriving criminal family business completely off-putting.
Getting out of a life of crime for an individual, or some revenge or balance getting achieved, and then building a new life, that can work.
But criminal families that merge / consolidate / restructure – count me out. I see all those children cursed in the next generation, all that never-ending fear and hiding and murdering and fighting… I cannot suspend belief for that.
@Elaine – who make repeated (seemingly knowing) mistakes in HR like getting aristocratic titles wrong or whohave heroines who are 21st century #metoo girls dressed up in corsets
High Five on both counts!
OMG THIS!
Inaccuracy in HR drives me crazy, especially regarding correct address with titles. It’s just lazy!
I can’t get Paullina SImons. I tried her first book and I couldnn’t finish it Everybody else seems to love her, though, so there must be something strange with me.
I had a mixed reaction to Paullina Simons. I found Alexander’s background as an American emigrant to the Soviet Union intriguing (there is an excellent non-fiction book by Tim Tzouliadis called “The forsaken” which is about these unfortunate emigrants). But Tatiana had a childlike (almost saintly) quality that I found hard going.
I dislike most romances about highwaymen, pirates and con artists. They basically seem like muggers dressed up with an historical background. Ick.
“muggers dressed up with an historical background” – I love this!! :)
I do not read psychological thrillers, and absolutely avoid serial killers.
Even with a strong romance, no thanks.
I am fed up with the type of very similar fears they play on.
I might break the rule if they were serial killing rich white men, maybe.
But I never saw that. Poor, female, „unimportant„ people die horribly.
And often, from focus, the killer becomes the main character.
No thanks.
Actually, this was a conscious decision at a certain point. Once I realized that I never feel good after such a read, and how much woman-hating happened in those books, by making them victims of horrible death most of the time.
Humor is unpredictable, many funny books do not work for me, and chick lit seems to celebrate stupidity, and self destructive tendencies, which is humor I do not get. But these are not hard „no“s, just a general need to be convinced.
For the most part, I gave up reading psychological suspense when it seemed to me that it was basically punishing women for loving the wrong person, trusting the wrong friend, making the wrong choice. In other words, a woman was punished for being a loving, caring person and getting gaslit and mind-f*cked. No thanks.
You put it extremely well – yes, exactly!
I’ve not found many romantic suspense novels that work for me, the Lady Julia Grey books are the only ones that come to mind right now.
But I do like well-written thrillers, and I don’t mind it going pretty dark. I like a kick-ass heroine going after the serial killer or terrorist or whatever, especially if she has some kind of special training or experience to bring to it. I really liked Nicci French’s Freida Klein series for that reason. Frieda just went and figured out the mystery, often at her own peril, but her training as a psychotherapist gave her the edge she needed to resolve stuff. Plus, she’s a really unusual protag for many reasons, not just that. Great series!
I also love John Sandford’s Prey series and Lawrence Block’s Matthew Scudder series. Both can be very very dark, but they are so wonderfully written and have continued their respective stories for 30 years of more in compelling ways. The MCs have aged and matured, gained wisdom, but retained their lethal ways when it comes to hunting down bad guys.
None of those last three series are romances in any way, just to be clear.
Misogyny seems built into the thrillers, much in the way it has been in slasher films. Today there is a trend for hard-boiled female detectives, maybe to offset the victimization of women and the sheer amount of violence done to women’s bodies. My aunt watches Dateline regularly and I have to say that about 85-90% of the weekly crimes examined in each show feature women as victims – quite depressing.
I’m intrigued by the idea of rich, white men as victims of thrillers. I think though there would be great backlash in the publishing industry if that trend took place, kind of like the fretting so many engaged in when women outed men at the start of the #MeToo Movement. Disrupting the status quo is painful for many.
Why pick any group to be victims?
I’d be intrigued by the idea of bad people as victims, not members of any set group.
Why do authors engage in dehumanizing stereotypes such as what Lieselotte pointed out above? The books sell, right? But why? Why are women overwhelmingly victimized in particular genres, such as slasher or thriller? How do readers as consumers respond to dehumanizing representations, especially critically conscious readers who read carefully for harmful depictions? If the stereotypes are flipped upside down, such as portraying rich, white men as victimized group, how would consumers respond, and would the outrage be hypocritical? My guess is yes, unfortunately. Sure, do away with stereotyping and rendering people into identity groups, but first, do away with the cultural practices that make this possible.
Yes.
And obviously, women read them.
Which is ok, of course.
I just stopped once I realized how utterly pervasive the victim = woman was.
Andhow often There was moral judgment = the „Bad“ women get to die.
Once I noticed, I couldn’t read anymore.
I have never been able to get into Julia Quinn books. I’ve tried the Bridgertons. I’ve tried her smythe series. I find them totally insufferable and most of them are so explicitly fatphobic, I feel like she, as an author would be personally offended by the idea of me (a fat woman!) imagining myself in the small, dainty slippers of her oh-so slender and perfect heroines. Yes, I feel this way even about Romancing Mr. Bridgerton.
On a similar note, after the release of “Good Luck with that,” I haven’t been able to read a single Kristan Higgins book.
Anything extreme bdsm, walking on broken glass seen as a romantic gesture just does not work for me. Add spiritual connotations and that’s an ‘inspirational ‘I positively dislike..
Stories described as romance that don’t have a hea. Love stories can be as heartbreaking as you like but call it romance and I’m expecting hea.
I’m a member of a discussion board for writers, and every now and then we have the HEA discussion with someone who doesn’t read romance.
“I’ve written a tragic love story where one of the people dies. Can this be marketed as a romance?”
No. The couple have to be together and happy at the end.
“But it’s got a paranormal element so at the end, he’s a ghost. And GHOST was such a romantic movie!”
It wasn’t a romance novel.
“Why should the nature of the ending define the genre for the entire book? If I write a story that’s all about the couple falling in love and building a relationship, and they get married on page 199, and on page 200 he gets hit by a truck, how could that not be a romance?”
Romance readers are not looking for a punch in the gut on the last page. If we want tragic love stories, we know where to find them, and it’s not on the romance shelves.
“But happy-ever-after endings are so old and predictable! And this limited, inflexible requirement constrains my creativity!”
HEAs are what romance readers want. If you don’t want to write them, don’t call your story a romance.
“But romance as a genre gets great sales.”
Ahhh…
This argument is crazy-making. Sigh….
*nods* This argument comes up on Twitter at least once a month (probably more often and I just don’t see it!)
But I honestly don’t understand what these people don’t get. Genre fiction has rules, and the HEA is the romance genre rule. I never see anyone saying “I wrote a mystery novel, but the mystery isn’t solved at the end (assuming it’s one book not a series), so can I market it as a mystery?”
Sadly, it really IS all about the money. And even more irritating is that these people trying to cash in on the romance market are often the ones who look down their noses at the genre anyway. Grrr…
This is a direct quote from someone on that discussion board :
“I would totally read a story about a detective who fails to solve the mystery. The main reason I don’t read mysteries is that you know the hero is going to figure out the villain by t