Problematic Romances: For Such a Time

Viridian said:

I've got a couple questions.

What should readers do about problematic books? Like: let's say a reader loves a problematic book. Should they... try not to like it? Refuse to read it in the first place?

What about writers? Should we strip our work of anything offensive?

Click to expand...

Going back a bit to reply to this comment.

I really like the "How to be a fan of problematic things" post here: http://www.socialjusticeleague.net/2011/09/how-to-be-a-fan-of-problematic-things/

Its general points are:

Firstly, acknowledge that the thing you like is problematic and do not attempt to make excuses for it.

Secondly, do not gloss over the issues or derail conversations about the problematic elements.

Thirdly you must acknowledge other, even less favourable, interpretations of the media you like.

And, of course, it has the general point that:

Liking problematic things doesn’t make you an asshole.

And shall we just carelessly allow children to hear any casual tales which may be devised by casual persons, and to receive into their minds ideas for the most part the very opposite of those which we should wish them to have when they are grown up?

We cannot.

Then the first thing will be to establish a censorship of the writers of fiction, and let the censors receive any tale of fiction which is good, and reject the bad; and we will desire mothers and nurses to tell their children the authorised ones only. Let them fashion the mind with such tales, even more fondly than they mould the body with their hands; but most of those which are now in use must be discarded.

- Book II of The Republic by Plato

Click to expand...

Lol, this is an old topic indeed.

In this particular instance, I disagree with Plato and the OP. Problematic works provoke important discussions, both for children and adults.

Oh, Plato, you dry old stick...

amergina said:

Does anyone know if there's any discussion going on inside the Christian inspirational community about this? Or a statement from the publisher or author?

Click to expand...

I would be surprised.

These are people with their own POV and it's not likely to change because a bunch of women found the book offensive (which it is, without a doubt).

The publishing house has their own standards of what they want, what they publish and what they deem to be Christian-like. Obviously this book met their requirements.

As far as the RITA judging - since you request what genres you can judge in, it's obvious that those of like-minded religious positions requested the Inspirational Romance entries. They wouldn't find anything wrong with this, I think, because it's what they read.

Of course I could be totally, horribly wrong.

Jami Gold's comment below the RWA blog post implies that a large number of members opt out of reading Inspirational so there may be some echo-chamber effect, but I don't think it's fair or accurate to assume so. Especially in light of Deb's posts. She clearly has a less rigidly fundamentalist view of her Christianity, so I think it's safe to assume there will be other people within the target readership who could find the theme of conversion under an unequal power dynamic problematic. 4 "yes" votes to be nominated isn't a very high bar, and among a "diverse" readership--and by that I strictly mean "diverse" within the genre group, from readers of C-fic who view religion more liberally, to those who are more fundamental--it wouldn't be very hard to come up with four thumbs up.

I'm no longer on the main Christian authors' loops, but I remain on a couple of minor ones, including the historical C-fic loop I moderate. I've seen no discussion of this book whatsoever.

I did check out SB/TB and the comment was pretty vitriolic. None of the kerfuffle makes me want to read this book, however. I read very little in C-fic nowadays save for an author or two whose work is an auto-buy for me.

Deb Kinnard said:

Why would an author submit to a Christian publisher a book that fits into a different faith? It'd be like sending Harlequin a police procedural or a hard SF story that doesn't contain any romance.

Click to expand...

It doesn't fit into a different faith, that's part of the problem. The FMC is a Jewish prisoner who converts to Christianity as part of her redemption arc. Ugh.

The MMC is a Concentration Camp Commandant. This book is not a romance. It's impossible to have a romance when one person can order the death of the other.

The Commandants of Theresienstadt supplied Jewish slaves to the German war effort.

~144,000 Jews were sent to Theresienstadt. 1,600 children were deported from Theresienstadt to Auschwitz, none of whom survived. 33,000 people died in Theresienstadt itself. A further 88,000 prisoners were deported to Auschwitz and other extermination camps, including Treblinka. Only 17,247 people of the 144,000 survived the Holocaust. This is the "hero" of this "romance".

I am a gentile and I am appalled.

Ultra, my comment above was made in response to the statement one of us made that inspirational fiction is predominantly Christian. As in, inspie is not inclusive of Jewish-themed fic or Islamic or Buddhist. The publishers who put out C-fic are very specific as to what they will accept and what they will not. One could not send them a project telling the love story of two devout Islamic people. They would simply send you a form-R. In fact, during the time I had a firmly CBA entrenched agent, she told me my stories set in the pre-reformation centuries would not fly because my characters would necessarily be Catholic and therefore not Christian.

Yeah, that. My jaw dropped. One of those moments that you wish you had the right zinger to fling back at an opinion, but I didn't come up with any till much, much later.

My point remains. If you're calling a project "inspirational" at this time and place, you're assumed to be presenting a Christian-based title.

Deb Kinnard said:

My point remains. If you're calling a project "inspirational" at this time and place, you're assumed to be presenting a Christian-based title.

Click to expand...

Yup. Even if your FMC is Jewish. It's not REALLY "inspirational" unless she converts. Feh.

But RWA doesn't have to follow publisher's guidelines for categories. There's no reason they couldn't include Jewish, Muslim, Tao, Wiccan, Rastafarianism, Buddhist, Jain, Hindu, Shinto, Zoroastrianism etc, etc, etc inspirational romances in their awards.

If a book is good, I like it. And if I knew about the problematic content, and bought and read it anyway, I don't think I get to complain later. To me, that's like buying and wearing a fur coat knowing what atrocities are behind it, and then giving the boutique a poor review because, cruelty.

I also don't think a moral lecture belongs in a book review - or a book, for that matter. I often wanna read a good ole Coelho or something he was involved in, and suddenly I find myself jesused.

If the reader has known about the problem before buying/reading, there's no grounds for complaints here I think, and any deduction of stars should be for other issues. Not for taking offense in offense you signed up for.

Now, is anything ever off-limits, ethically? It should be, perhaps, but it's never gonna happen. Controversial or not, even Nazis get to be in love, and so do Jews, with the wrong people. While I'm no fan of the "jesus me out of this" thing either, it makes sense as a safety measure. I haven't read the book and don't know how strongly it advertizes religion, but even if it may seem questionable, if it works for the story or for the character, it should be used.

If a book is beautifully written, if it's well researched, but if the central idea is problematic for the genre: a high-ranking SS officer willfully complicit in genocide as the hero... and a Jewish woman who converts...

Do you review it as it stands, for what it is outside the greater issues, or stop and say "You know, this isn't okay."

Click to expand...

If I know what awaits me, I consent to the content. If it's not okay with me, I can simply not read it.

As for the double standard - complicit in genocide, yet protective of one beloved Jew - this is human nature at its finest. We are all hypocrites. We pet our dog while eating a cow's baby, we screech about injustice within our own circle yet leave poor people down the street to starve, we want to be loved but make so many feel unloved. I think a Nazi and a Jew are a marvelous pair to illustrate this hypocrisy and dilemma of moral convenience. As a symbol, they should be rubbed in our faces over and over and over.

Ravioli said:

If a book is good, I like it. And if I knew about the problematic content, and bought and read it anyway, I don't think I get to complain later. To me, that's like buying and wearing a fur coat knowing what atrocities are behind it, and then giving the boutique a poor review because, cruelty.

Click to expand...

I've actually been taken to task for criticizing books I haven't read (e.g. 50 Shades.) And I think the person criticizing me had a point. How can you truly have a nuanced and thoughtful discussion about the material if you haven't been exposed to it? (Obviously we are doing our best here as it doesn't sound to me like anyone posting in this thread has actually read the book.) I would argue that for a deconstruction of any problematic work to have maximum impact it is necessary to fully understand it. If we just avoided everything we didn't agree with, we'd be living very limited lives.

As for the double standard - complicit in genocide, yet protective of one beloved Jew - this is human nature at its finest. We are all hypocrites. We pet our dog while eating a cow's baby, we screech about injustice within our own circle yet leave poor people down the street to starve, we want to be loved but make so many feel unloved. I think a Nazi and a Jew are a marvelous pair to illustrate this hypocrisy and dilemma of moral convenience. As a symbol, they should be rubbed in our faces over and over and over.

Click to expand...

That's a tragic and excellent point, but it doesn't sound at all like the point the author was trying to make. It sounds like the expectation was that this story be taken at face value as a romance, which is yes, problematic. The problem isn't necessarily the content in and of itself but the fact that nobody within that niche really seems to understand why some might consider this offensive. In the very least it warrants a discussion.

I think it also raises some broader issues about how bizarrely tolerant romance readers can be of the heroes in books. As mentioned upthread, they can do all manner of horrible things from rape to attempted murder and still be taken seriously as heroes. Even in my own book I've worried that I've pushed my own hero beyond the moral event horizon, but no matter what jackass thing he does, people seem to root for him anyway. That's great if you want your character to be flawed yet sympathetic, but I've noticed heroines seem to get a lot less leeway. I wonder why that is?

I could be wrong, but I think Christian inspie romances far outnumber any other religion or spiritual belief. Not that I'm familiar with all publishers in existence, but in my limited knowledge base, most of the publishers I've seen that are looking for inspirationals use the term as synonymous with "Christian." I know of one very small e-pub that at one point was looking for pagan inspirationals, but that's the only non-Christian one I can think of.

Newsweek picks up the story. And seems to think that Vox Day, of all people, is a good source.

dolores haze said:

Newsweek picks up the story. And seems to think that Vox Day, of all people, is a good source.

Click to expand...

Dang it! I haven't knowingly looked at a Newsweek article for years but it says I've hit the 5 articles per month max . Anyone care to elaborate on the article?

OceanMadness said:

I think it also raises some broader issues about how bizarrely tolerant romance readers can be of the heroes in books. As mentioned upthread, they can do all manner of horrible things from rape to attempted murder and still be taken seriously as heroes. Even in my own book I've worried that I've pushed my own hero beyond the moral event horizon, but no matter what jackass thing he does, people seem to root for him anyway.

Click to expand...

I read mostly fantasy before coming to romance, and fantasy heroes fuck shit up all the time. Assassins, murderers, warlords, rapists... Khal Drogo (Game of Thrones) is a possessive warlord who raped a young girl. Artemis Entreri (Forgotten Realms) is a cold blooded murderer who rose to power working for a drug cartel. Kratos (God of War) murdered his wife and child.

Yeah, readers sometimes forgive romance heroes for stalking and violence. But in other genres, the question of forgiveness doesn't even come up.

If this book wasn't romance, I don't think people would hate it as much. It's the fact we're supposed to see all of this in a romantic light that makes it extra uncomfortable.

It basically reiterates what's been said here.

Caveat: I've not read the book. I won't be reading the book. Some of my ancestors were German, though they already lived in this country at the time of the war. It squicks me out.

That said, apparently this book in some people's eyes was all okay until it got the nod for a major award. That displeases me. If a book is offensive, it's offensive (again, I haven't read it), and Christian-big-publisher fiction usually flies under the mainstream industry's radar. It's as though it's the Rita consideration that offends, and that's wrong on a couple of different levels.

Deb Kinnard said:

It basically reiterates what's been said here.

Click to expand...

I should have said that better...or rather, not assumed people here are mind-readers. (Oy, puppy.) I'm really curious how Vox Day got in the mix. When worlds collide....

But thank you for attempting to address my lamely-worded inquiry, Deb.

ElaineA said:

I should have said that better...or rather, not assumed people here are mind-readers. (Oy, puppy.) I'm really curious how Vox Day got in the mix. When worlds collide....

But thank you for attempting to address my lamely-worded inquiry, Deb.

Click to expand...

The article offered a few different points of view.

First they talked about how Smart Bitches called the book problematic and how this discussion started. No new information there.

Then they gave a quote from the author; the author apologized and expressed her compassion for Jewish people. She explained how uplifting the story of Esther is supposed to be and how it relates to the book.

Then they offered Vox Day's point of view. Honestly it was nothing interesting. Just some predictable blather about how "social justice warriors" are ruining life for everyone.

Viridian said:

Then they offered Vox Day's point of view. Honestly it was nothing interesting. Just some predictable blather about how "social justice warriors" are ruining life for everyone.

Click to expand...

Oh, of course...

amergina said:

I believe one of not-the-voice-of-god's follower's provided him a link to the whole thing.

Why Newsweek thought he'd be a good person to have as an opposing voice, I have NO idea. He's not involved with romance at all. And really, if you're arguing that you just LOVE the Jews... you don't want not-the-voice-of-god on your side.

Click to expand...

Yeah, this is what had me shaking my head. I mean, how big is RWA? I'm sure there's an opposing voice somewhere.

Thank you both for the additional information, as sigh-y as it makes me.

They'd have no dearth of romance authors on opposite sides if they chose to go to the RWA for quotes.

Instead, they go to a man for a quote on fiction aimed primarily at women. Is this because girl cooties, or some lame-headed attempt at balance, or...?

My mind boggles. Unless they deliberately asked someone for a quote who's embroiled in other kinds of controversy, and just thought they'd get clickbaity.

I haven't read this book, but the underlying problem is something I've dealt with. Can an "anti-hero", one who kills, be a hero and LI? My answer is yes. But I didn't try to deal with such a large issue.

Honestly, I think the issue could have been solved by editing. Make the concentration camp a fictional one. Make it fictional-but-real by altering history about a camp that was washed from the German records because the commandant went "off the reservation" by letting the prisoners loose. Make the heroine one of Jewish birth but unsure about her place in life and therefore open to other faiths. Make them both heroes by helping the escape, knowing they will be killed even if they succeed. Such is the making of an epic romance.

You can show the horrors that existed, but put your people to the side of history by giving hope for the future of people who might have survived. JMHO, FWIW.

Deb Kinnard said:

Ultra, my comment above was made in response to the statement one of us made that inspirational fiction is predominantly Christian. As in, inspie is not inclusive of Jewish-themed fic or Islamic or Buddhist. The publishers who put out C-fic are very specific as to what they will accept and what they will not. One could not send them a project telling the love story of two devout Islamic people. They would simply send you a form-R. [...] My point remains. If you're calling a project "inspirational" at this time and place, you're assumed to be presenting a Christian-based title.

Click to expand...

I hear your point here, but the decision to write a Christian inspirational romance between a Nazi and a Jewish woman is an intentional one - the author selected that subgenre and applied its genre conventions deliberately. It's not like she accidentally tripped and fell into a subgenre. She could have written this story differently and pitched it to somebody other than a Christian inspirational publisher. I don't think the conventions of Christian inspirational romance are necessarily a valid reason for having Jewish concentration camp victims convert to Christianity. The author has plenty of other options, particularly not trying to make it a Christian inspirational romance.