Alexis’s review of The Flame and the Flower (Birmingham, #1) > Likes and Comments
77 likes · Like
Was this one of the columns you wrote for All About Romance back in the day? They were a hoot and a half, and they led me straight to Glitterland.
The 80’s romance was soooo rapey, but I read them all when I was way too young.
And the happy slaves! Don't forget all the happy slaves! I loved this as a teen and then re-read it as an adult and was utterly HORRIFIED! (But still have a place in my heart for the equally rapey The Wolf and the Dove, so apparently I still have no taste.)
Obviously I read the other kind of romance - mainly Georgette Heyer - Only Gone with the wind has some similarities (but a very much more active heroine)
I'm from 1990 and didn't really read romance till my twenties besides two Cathrine Gaskell books. And then I started with Kaylie Scott and her tough and resourceful women.
I read some of the 80's books and there was a lot of "what the actuall.....?!?!?!?" going on, but somehow they suck you in anyway and I always read till the end. They are somehow fascinating especially when you take into account, that women wrote them
I am ded!! 😂 That was hilarious! I’m from the 60s so I’m one of those teems that was reading these lovely bodice er chemise rippers. 👀 Right now I am ever so glad I have resisted the urge to re-read them. 🤦🏼♀️🤣
Susan wrote: "Was this one of the columns you wrote for All About Romance back in the day? They were a hoot and a half, and they led me straight to Glitterland."
Yes, I'd honestly forgotten about them - very glad to leave that almighty shitshow firmly in the past. But then I was tidying my GR up at the beginning of this year, and I found the reviews all had dead links - so I thought I might as well try to dig them up again so I, at least, could remember. It's been a surprisingly nice thing to revisit.
Beatriz wrote: "The 80’s romance was soooo rapey, but I read them all when I was way too young."
Yes, it's ... a whole complicated thing, for sure, the role of rape in the development of the genre.
Julie wrote: "And the happy slaves! Don't forget all the happy slaves! I loved this as a teen and then re-read it as an adult and was utterly HORRIFIED! (But still have a place in my heart for the equally rapey ..."
Good lord, I'd genuinely blocked out the happy slaves. I think it's hard not to have a soft spot for formative reads, even if they startle our adult selves. Please do not tempt to read the wolf and the dove 😂
Sophie wrote: "Obviously I read the other kind of romance - mainly Georgette Heyer - Only Gone with the wind has some similarities (but a very much more active heroine)"
GWTW is very much a guilty pleasure for me. Although the pleasure should be questionable given the, err, really super racist backdrop there.
Lulu wrote: "I'm from 1990 and didn't really read romance till my twenties besides two Cathrine Gaskell books. And then I started with Kaylie Scott and her tough and resourceful women.
I read some of the 80's ..."
I find them pretty fascinating too - I mean, without them we wouldn't have the genre we have today.
Jody wrote: "I'm loving these archival reviews!"
Thank you so much <3
yekcal2 wrote: "I am ded!! 😂 That was hilarious! I’m from the 60s so I’m one of those teems that was reading these lovely bodice er chemise rippers. 👀 Right now I am ever so glad I have resisted the urge to re-rea..."
Probably for the best ;)
Thank you for such a great review. I probably enjoyed it more since sarcastic is my middle name. I read reviews before I consider make the investment in my time and money. And you made this choice quite easy. All you had to do was mention the word “Rape”. Now I know that it’s a disgusting fact in our society but I don’t want to read about it, especially in a romance novel. I also refuse to have an author profit from using it as a plot point. I know it’s something I hear way too much of in real life. Call me a prude but I don’t need more of it in my reading experience.
Jeff (buriedundermybooks) wrote: "Thank you for such a great review. I probably enjoyed it more since sarcastic is my middle name. I read reviews before I consider make the investment in my time and money. And you made this choice ..."
I completely understand why SA is a deal breaker for many people.
I think, for me, when it comes to the romance genre, and especially books from the genre's past, I try to approach SA as something to be understand within the narrative terms of the genre rather than as having reference to the real world.
But, again, I completely understand why it's a dealbreaker for some people. And there are many present-day romances that do not contain SA (or if they do, it's to explore the topic).
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Susan
(new)
Jan 11, 2025 05:18AM
Was this one of the columns you wrote for All About Romance back in the day? They were a hoot and a half, and they led me straight to Glitterland.
reply
|
flag
The 80’s romance was soooo rapey, but I read them all when I was way too young.
And the happy slaves! Don't forget all the happy slaves! I loved this as a teen and then re-read it as an adult and was utterly HORRIFIED! (But still have a place in my heart for the equally rapey The Wolf and the Dove, so apparently I still have no taste.)
Obviously I read the other kind of romance - mainly Georgette Heyer - Only Gone with the wind has some similarities (but a very much more active heroine)
I'm from 1990 and didn't really read romance till my twenties besides two Cathrine Gaskell books. And then I started with Kaylie Scott and her tough and resourceful women. I read some of the 80's books and there was a lot of "what the actuall.....?!?!?!?" going on, but somehow they suck you in anyway and I always read till the end. They are somehow fascinating especially when you take into account, that women wrote them
I am ded!! 😂 That was hilarious! I’m from the 60s so I’m one of those teems that was reading these lovely bodice er chemise rippers. 👀 Right now I am ever so glad I have resisted the urge to re-read them. 🤦🏼♀️🤣
Susan wrote: "Was this one of the columns you wrote for All About Romance back in the day? They were a hoot and a half, and they led me straight to Glitterland."Yes, I'd honestly forgotten about them - very glad to leave that almighty shitshow firmly in the past. But then I was tidying my GR up at the beginning of this year, and I found the reviews all had dead links - so I thought I might as well try to dig them up again so I, at least, could remember. It's been a surprisingly nice thing to revisit.
Beatriz wrote: "The 80’s romance was soooo rapey, but I read them all when I was way too young."
Yes, it's ... a whole complicated thing, for sure, the role of rape in the development of the genre.
Julie wrote: "And the happy slaves! Don't forget all the happy slaves! I loved this as a teen and then re-read it as an adult and was utterly HORRIFIED! (But still have a place in my heart for the equally rapey ..."
Good lord, I'd genuinely blocked out the happy slaves. I think it's hard not to have a soft spot for formative reads, even if they startle our adult selves. Please do not tempt to read the wolf and the dove 😂
Sophie wrote: "Obviously I read the other kind of romance - mainly Georgette Heyer - Only Gone with the wind has some similarities (but a very much more active heroine)"
GWTW is very much a guilty pleasure for me. Although the pleasure should be questionable given the, err, really super racist backdrop there.
Lulu wrote: "I'm from 1990 and didn't really read romance till my twenties besides two Cathrine Gaskell books. And then I started with Kaylie Scott and her tough and resourceful women.
I read some of the 80's ..."
I find them pretty fascinating too - I mean, without them we wouldn't have the genre we have today.
Jody wrote: "I'm loving these archival reviews!"
Thank you so much <3
yekcal2 wrote: "I am ded!! 😂 That was hilarious! I’m from the 60s so I’m one of those teems that was reading these lovely bodice er chemise rippers. 👀 Right now I am ever so glad I have resisted the urge to re-rea..."
Probably for the best ;)
Thank you for such a great review. I probably enjoyed it more since sarcastic is my middle name. I read reviews before I consider make the investment in my time and money. And you made this choice quite easy. All you had to do was mention the word “Rape”. Now I know that it’s a disgusting fact in our society but I don’t want to read about it, especially in a romance novel. I also refuse to have an author profit from using it as a plot point. I know it’s something I hear way too much of in real life. Call me a prude but I don’t need more of it in my reading experience.
Jeff (buriedundermybooks) wrote: "Thank you for such a great review. I probably enjoyed it more since sarcastic is my middle name. I read reviews before I consider make the investment in my time and money. And you made this choice ..."I completely understand why SA is a deal breaker for many people.
I think, for me, when it comes to the romance genre, and especially books from the genre's past, I try to approach SA as something to be understand within the narrative terms of the genre rather than as having reference to the real world.
But, again, I completely understand why it's a dealbreaker for some people. And there are many present-day romances that do not contain SA (or if they do, it's to explore the topic).
