Or, I have no idea what Ryan Gosling OR the creator of “Feminist Ryan Gosling” actually think about romance novels, but this post made me think of them, and the association of the two made me laugh
Romance novels almost invariably have:
- traditionally beautiful heroine and handsome hero
- M/F relationship, often where he has more power than she does either financially or socially or both
- the first (and usually therefore most important) sex scene in the missionary position
- the heroine defining her happiness in terms of getting her man’s undying love
- a reputation as being smut/trash/throwaway reading with no literary merit or redeeming value
- a firmly entrenched attachment to the form of text-only book. And, of course, strictly text books are becoming an archaic form in the digital world and with all the speculation about “enhanced ebooks” and “interactive social networking reading experiences” supposedly on the horizon….
So, yeah, I mean, romance novels kind of propagate the patrimonial shackles FRG is railing against there.
Too bad I love them anyway.
Also, as a consumer and creator of such “mediocre, archaic forms of media” as romance novels, I disagree with the feminist reading of them, even though I understand why it exists. So I guess this post isn’t really about Feminist Ryan Gosling at all–just the feminist view of romance novels. Let’s all hold hands and have a laugh at that, shall we?