Give Thanks for Romance: The Grand Finale

When I'm not wasting time staring open-mouthed at UrbanDictionary.com - totally enawed at the ability of young'ns to come up with nifty ways to say naughty things - I like to talk, write and think about, well, literary versions of overly large, oftimes pulsing, straining, and growing-impossibly-larger /thicker /painfully-hard-against-the-placket-of-his-breeches hero manhoods.

Some of you know this about me. To those of you who don't, or who haven't acquired this particular penchant - cheers! Welcome to my wonderful world of examining every aspect of romance to the smallest detail. Of course, that's an intended pun. But it's also my way of letting you know I'm not a total lech who only wants to talk about the anatomy of romance sexuality. I like to think about why I - and other readers - find certain sexual imagery appealing and arousing.

For instance, not only is there a preponderance of deliciously tumescent behemoth manroot in romance today, but I'm noticing more and more reference to the near supernatural attributes of clinginess and rippling muscle control of those centers of womanly womanliness, that warm welcoming hot heat known in some circles as "her most sacred, secret sheath of desire."

Yes, romance fans, in addition to slipping into the placeholding roles of all kinds of heroine bods - perfect to realistic -- we get to fantasize about having more than just the kind of flower of femininity (FOF) that a hero experiences once and decides he can't live w/out -- and for which he'll eschew all other FOF for the rest of his natural and eternal life. We can fantasize about having the uber-core, which remains as tantalizingly snuggly to our hero through the years-and-a-passle-of-young'ns-later epilogue, as it was when he introduced us to the delights of sin with is bad ol rakish self.

While I'd planned to go on at magnificent, well-beyond-average length about these dandy romance anatomical anamolies, I got a little sidetracked by something that I'm seeing more often in romance, but may have been around a while.

It's a style of writing that includes what I like to call the ubiquitous "Ask the Reader" query. Goes a little something like this:

She espied his flaring torch of love and decided it might be decidedly too magnificent in light of her most excellently snug FOF. It couldn't possibly fit. Could it?

Our "Ask the Reader" query is the words, "Could it?" Seems lots of authors now remind the reader of what they, the author, already have established. Which is to say, the "point of view" character telling the story at that point must ask the reader her opinion of the matter, just in case her own perception is skewed. The character's asking us to affirm the opposite of what she thinks is true, usually in an effort to bolster the "upside" of a situation that she may not be aware of -- or wishes were the case.

But, perhaps I'm not being clear. Am I?

Posted in: sex, love, romance novels, authors, men, heroes, blogs, heroines, lady of light and..., c.l. lewis

E-mail | Permalink | Print