Melissa at Proffitt.com
Mon Mar 11 23:49:11 EST 2002
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 14:45:17 +1100, Sally Odgers wrote:
>> Heh. That's pretty much what I planned to say. Is she a big fan of
>> novels? If that's all she reads, no wonder she thinks DWJ's relationships
>> are contrived and last-minute. :)
>Far be it from Me to Disagree with Melissa ... but there's one greatly
>beloved writer of romance novels who almost *always* leaves one totally in
>the dark about the hero's romantic feeling. Much worse (IMO) the hero
>deliberately leads the heroine to believe he *doesn't* care for her. And
>there's never any good reason why he should be so cagey. Sadistic, I call
Yeah, but ONE writer? Out of all those other ones where it's Obvious who's
in love with who?
But it's good you mentioned this, because I didn't mean to imply that *all*
romance novels are part of some monolithic entity. That's what the smiley
was for...because I personally like romance novels myself, and know better.
But that wasn't very clear, was it.
Anyway. Narrowness bad. Broad scope of reading good. So there. And feel
free to disagree all you want. Good for the liver, or something.
and P.S., but there are a number of well-admired writers I simply don't
comprehend, but *I* would NEVER dismiss them as bad writers because of my
lack of intelligence. Like Robertson Davies, who is...sorry, I have just
not the faintest idea what the point is. If someone could please explain
Modern Fiction to me I would be very grateful.
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj