How Sappy is Too Sappy?
And when does it become just plain cheese?
Admittedly, I've been guilty of writing some cheesy stories in my time. I like writing a bit of cheese now and then just because it's fun. But sometimes the cheese is just too strong to stand.
I've just lost the zeal for a particular author. This author was one of my very first favorites. I discovered her books when I was a young (really young) woman. Her books were the first ones to inspire author recognition. Up until then, I had never taken notice of who wrote a book. Since then have consumed just about every book of hers that I could get my hands on. Unfortunately, as happens sometimes, she's gone the way of the cheese.
Happily Ever Afters, or HEA's as their called, are of utmost importance to me when reading a romance book. Without the HEA there really isn't any point, right? The best kind of HEA's though, are the ones that don't make me gag. The "I love you. I've been so stupid. Will you marry me?" part can either make your heart swell with satisfaction or make you want to hurl. I just finished a book, by this favored author that had the latter effect. (No, it wasn't Pleasure Slave. That book kicked some serious butt! I especially loved the part in the epilogue when the heroine is in labor and asks the hero "How could you do this to me?!" Hero looks at her confused and asks, "What?" to which the heroine screams out, "Impregnate me, you bastard!" ROFL That was classic.) Ahem. Back to topic.
Out of respect to the author, I won't name the cheesy cheesefest I just finished. She has, after all, been responsible for at least a handful of some of my yearly "re-reads." (books I periodically re-read at least once a year. My fallbacks, if you will) I must, however, vent a little.
Beyond the gag inducing cheesey "I love yous" at the end, the entire plot and conflict and all was utterly contrived and mostly filled with backstory from the previous two releases of the miniseries. Yeah, backstory is sometimes needed and important to the development of the plot. Backstory that concerns irrelevant details on her previously published sisters, isn't. I don't need to know how her sisters met and fell in love with their husbands. Nor do I want to sit through the nauseating declarations of her sisters about how utterly in love and happy they are and how entirely perfect their husbands are. Not only is it nauseating, much of it is condescending to the as-yet-unmarried and recently heartbroken sister ("Oh dear, I'm certain you'll find someone as wonderful as our husbands someday to make you just as happy as we are.") and the rest is entirely unrealistic. No one talks like that in real life. Seriously. I don't care how smitten you are with someone. You don't go around telling anyone who will listen that "Oh, I never imagined that I would find someone to love me so much and take care of me. I can't wait to give him as many children as he wants and I would die for him." Well, something along those lines anyway.
Maybe it's the independent woman in me that mucks it up, but I personally can't stand the whole, "I need a man to complete me" message that stories of this nature sends. Romance should be about falling in love so completely that you marry him despite all objections, fears, etc not because you him to take care of you and make you whole. If you ain't already complete baby, ain't no man gonna make it so. He is, after all, just man. He can't complete you anymore than you can complete him. But I digress.
And why, Lord, must the hero make up a lie to get the heroine to marry him? He knows she loves him even though he broke her heart. She's the one who thinks he doesn't love her. Why in heaven's name can't he just bite his pride and say, "Baby, I was an ass. I do love you. I never meant to hurt you. Even though I'm unworthy, marry me. Let me make it up to you." All she can do is say, "Um, no. You're right. You are an ass and frankly I don't give a darn about your silly little excuse for why you crushed my heart and rejected me all those months ago. Get lost." At least then he'll know, right? He won't have to come up with some far fetched scheme to trick her into marrying him in hopes of seducing her into loving him. Dude. If the loves there, it's there. If it ain't, well, ain't no amount of sloppy kisses and sexual innuendos gonna make it happen. And btw, can the whole "I'm hurt because you want this pseudo-marriage to end as quickly as possible because you don't know that it's actually a real marriage and I'm not going to let you go" wounded expression. It's just plain silly. He put himself in that position. He wants her to admit that she loves him after he crushed her heart? Well honey, it'd go a lot smoother if he went first.
I actually love a good conflict in a story. It's what makes the romance all the better and gives you that "awwwwe" feeling at the end when the characters overcome it. But not when it's conflict that was just created out of thin air for no other reason than because the hero lost his balls and chickened out when all he really needed to do was say the words. That's when I get really irritated and angry with a book. Be a man, dangit! If he can't spit it out to begin with move on so she can find someone who CAN!
I've read hundreds of books with similar scenarios and they never fail to induce books slamming against the wall and rolling of the eyes. I just never expected to read one from this particular author. I've always trusted her in the past to supply me with an emotional, well thought out, well plotted and extremely romantic read. So what would make an author go the way of the cheese?
One may never know. What I do know is this: My faith in this author is irrevocably shaken and I may never trust her enough to buy any more of her books. This, to me, is a sad thing indeed. I feel as though I've just been betrayed by one of my very best friends.
Admittedly, I've been guilty of writing some cheesy stories in my time. I like writing a bit of cheese now and then just because it's fun. But sometimes the cheese is just too strong to stand.
I've just lost the zeal for a particular author. This author was one of my very first favorites. I discovered her books when I was a young (really young) woman. Her books were the first ones to inspire author recognition. Up until then, I had never taken notice of who wrote a book. Since then have consumed just about every book of hers that I could get my hands on. Unfortunately, as happens sometimes, she's gone the way of the cheese.
Happily Ever Afters, or HEA's as their called, are of utmost importance to me when reading a romance book. Without the HEA there really isn't any point, right? The best kind of HEA's though, are the ones that don't make me gag. The "I love you. I've been so stupid. Will you marry me?" part can either make your heart swell with satisfaction or make you want to hurl. I just finished a book, by this favored author that had the latter effect. (No, it wasn't Pleasure Slave. That book kicked some serious butt! I especially loved the part in the epilogue when the heroine is in labor and asks the hero "How could you do this to me?!" Hero looks at her confused and asks, "What?" to which the heroine screams out, "Impregnate me, you bastard!" ROFL That was classic.) Ahem. Back to topic.
Out of respect to the author, I won't name the cheesy cheesefest I just finished. She has, after all, been responsible for at least a handful of some of my yearly "re-reads." (books I periodically re-read at least once a year. My fallbacks, if you will) I must, however, vent a little.
Beyond the gag inducing cheesey "I love yous" at the end, the entire plot and conflict and all was utterly contrived and mostly filled with backstory from the previous two releases of the miniseries. Yeah, backstory is sometimes needed and important to the development of the plot. Backstory that concerns irrelevant details on her previously published sisters, isn't. I don't need to know how her sisters met and fell in love with their husbands. Nor do I want to sit through the nauseating declarations of her sisters about how utterly in love and happy they are and how entirely perfect their husbands are. Not only is it nauseating, much of it is condescending to the as-yet-unmarried and recently heartbroken sister ("Oh dear, I'm certain you'll find someone as wonderful as our husbands someday to make you just as happy as we are.") and the rest is entirely unrealistic. No one talks like that in real life. Seriously. I don't care how smitten you are with someone. You don't go around telling anyone who will listen that "Oh, I never imagined that I would find someone to love me so much and take care of me. I can't wait to give him as many children as he wants and I would die for him." Well, something along those lines anyway.
Maybe it's the independent woman in me that mucks it up, but I personally can't stand the whole, "I need a man to complete me" message that stories of this nature sends. Romance should be about falling in love so completely that you marry him despite all objections, fears, etc not because you him to take care of you and make you whole. If you ain't already complete baby, ain't no man gonna make it so. He is, after all, just man. He can't complete you anymore than you can complete him. But I digress.
And why, Lord, must the hero make up a lie to get the heroine to marry him? He knows she loves him even though he broke her heart. She's the one who thinks he doesn't love her. Why in heaven's name can't he just bite his pride and say, "Baby, I was an ass. I do love you. I never meant to hurt you. Even though I'm unworthy, marry me. Let me make it up to you." All she can do is say, "Um, no. You're right. You are an ass and frankly I don't give a darn about your silly little excuse for why you crushed my heart and rejected me all those months ago. Get lost." At least then he'll know, right? He won't have to come up with some far fetched scheme to trick her into marrying him in hopes of seducing her into loving him. Dude. If the loves there, it's there. If it ain't, well, ain't no amount of sloppy kisses and sexual innuendos gonna make it happen. And btw, can the whole "I'm hurt because you want this pseudo-marriage to end as quickly as possible because you don't know that it's actually a real marriage and I'm not going to let you go" wounded expression. It's just plain silly. He put himself in that position. He wants her to admit that she loves him after he crushed her heart? Well honey, it'd go a lot smoother if he went first.
I actually love a good conflict in a story. It's what makes the romance all the better and gives you that "awwwwe" feeling at the end when the characters overcome it. But not when it's conflict that was just created out of thin air for no other reason than because the hero lost his balls and chickened out when all he really needed to do was say the words. That's when I get really irritated and angry with a book. Be a man, dangit! If he can't spit it out to begin with move on so she can find someone who CAN!
I've read hundreds of books with similar scenarios and they never fail to induce books slamming against the wall and rolling of the eyes. I just never expected to read one from this particular author. I've always trusted her in the past to supply me with an emotional, well thought out, well plotted and extremely romantic read. So what would make an author go the way of the cheese?
One may never know. What I do know is this: My faith in this author is irrevocably shaken and I may never trust her enough to buy any more of her books. This, to me, is a sad thing indeed. I feel as though I've just been betrayed by one of my very best friends.
Comments