Wednesday, April 27, 2005

More on prejudice

I made reference yesterday to Sylvia's comments on prejudice against erotic publishers. In case you didn't follow the link, here's the quote in question, from a letter to the editor of the RWR (the RWA's publication):

"Also we may want to stop prattling on about how ‘we just don’t get no respect’ when we allow dopey-looking hunks in ridiculous costumes advertising an erotic publisher on our back cover. There’s a big difference between sensual romance and erotica, and I think we made a big mistake in lowering our standards to accept such a publisher."

Hmmmm. Two different issues here, yes? One is the covers. As Shannon points out so adroitly, romance novel covers have a long history of featuring "dopey-looking hunks in ridiculous costumes." One word: Fabio.

Issue number two is the idea that RWA "lowered its standards" to admit EC. (I assume we're talking about EC here; although Zebra and Harlequin both publish erotic romance, I doubt anyone would seriously suggest Harlequin should be booted from the RWA.) But as Ellen pointed out in the discussion on Sylvia's site, RWA didn't "lower its standards" to let Ellora's Cave in-- EC met the guidelines fair and square.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home