What’s the Difference Between Romantasy and Romantic Fantasy?
Since romance is in the air, I thought we could discuss the rapidly growing genre known as romantasy.
It’s easy to look at the newly coined term and think “Romance” + “Fantasy” = “Romantasy” but it’s not that simple. We already have fantasy with romance in it (and romance with fantasy elements), so how is “romantasy” any different?
Well, let’s start with Twilight. Though this novel isn’t a romantasy, it will help me explain publishing formulas. For instance, though Twilight is a paranormal romance, it is a romance first; the paranormal aspects are secondary. Therefore, the main plot is a romance, and the subplot is the paranormal world. Edward and Bella’s relationship matters more than if Bella is going to become a vampire. “Paranormal” is describing the “romance” in the term “paranormal romance.”
This goes to say that this formula is very important in publishing, and subtle differences can give way to whole new genre models, where readerships have expectations for the stories claiming that label.So, when we see a new term emerge such as “romantasy” we need to make sure we are using it correctly. Granted, this genre is still developing. I imagine we will see “romantasy” break up into various subsets of itself. For now, though, this is what we know:
Romantasy is a romance/fantasy blend, where romance and fantasy elements need to have an equal presence. In other words, romance isn’t the main plot, and neither is the fantasy. It’s both the main plot and the subplot. That means the romance is too much of a focus to be considered a subplot. Neither element can exist without the other. This is a very difficult thing to do successfully. Most stories are balanced by a main plot and a subplot, so it takes a lot of effort to make sure these elements are equally intertwined without bogging down a story.
If you’re interested in reading books like this, there’s been a huge wave of very successful adult romantasies lately: From Blood and Ash by Jennifer Armentrout, The Fourth Wing by Rebecca Yarros, and the ACOTAR series by Sarah J. Maas.
But couldn’t these books be called romantic fantasy?
Maybe.
Lots of folks will have different opinions on what makes a romantasy differ from a romantic fantasy or fantasy romance (and these definitions will continue to morph overtime), but in my opinion, a romantic fantasy is a fantasy first, romance second, while a fantasy romance would be a romance first, fantasy second. (Just like the formula I mentioned above for a paranormal romance.) The right term is dependent on which plot is most prevalent. Based on that, genre expectations develop. For example, a Happily Ever After (HEA) must exist in a romance, but a romantic fantasy only requires romantic elements. This means its version of a HEA could differ. It’s anyone’s guess!
My guess is that we’re going to see romantasy continue to boom. It’s the perfect bridge for readers who don’t feel like they’re connecting with teen protagonists in the YA sphere anymore but also struggle with finding a foothold in the adult SFF market. I say this while acknowledging that most of these romantasy books are shelved in the adult SFF space. But the adult SFF has catered to a certain gaze for a very long time. We’re just now seeing a new emergence of voices being welcomed into the space. There’re exceptions to this, of course. But now I’m getting into the nitty gritty. Granted, getting into the details is important. If we don’t, we may not see the genre solidify its expectations and therefore lose potential readers due to mass confusion on what, exactly, these labels mean.
How does this happen?
Well, BookTok and social media algorithms make it very tempting for an author to use a trending term to reach new readers, especially when there’s natural crossover. I, myself, have used the term “romantasy” to describe the Timely Death trilogy because the readership is very similar. But as I’m seeing the definition solidify, I am less likely to use it. Why? Because readers will start to develop expectations for books that are using the term, and if they continuously pick up books dubbing themselves “romantasy” when they’re not, it could only hurt the trust that reader has for the author or publisher using the term incorrectly.
Basically, we have a responsibility to continue to define this term and be aware of how it should be used to connect readers with the right books. The definition will continue to evolve, of course, but it must be done thoughtfully.
I look forward to seeing how it develops (and I absolutely can’t wait to read more romantasy)!
In the meantime, I hope this helps you explore it more.
What are your thoughts on romantasy? Do you have any book recommendations? I’d love to hear them!
~SAT
