Bon bons for the mind

I confess, I'm an addict. Romance novels ...

It all started when I was about 12 and my mother told me I should read Gone With the Wind followed by Rebecca and Ramona. From there I wandered through all of duMaurier's books, a bunch of Gothics--loved Gothics--then stumbled onto Georgette Heyer by the time I was 14.

I still love Georgette Heyer. Lots of people do. There are sites dedicated to the Regency period, with histories, costumes, manners and mores, a list of the peerage in order of precedence and forms of address, maps of London with who (meaning in the aristocracy) lived where. The Georgian Index is one of my favorites. There are glossaries of slang and I will every once in a while use a phrase Heyer used, my favorites being "her attic's to let," or "shatter-brained," or even "pocket Venus." I actually used the latter in a script.

There's a great story out of St. Louis. Evidently, in the 1970s, they used to host Georgette Heyer Teas at the St. Louis Museum of Art. Those lovely, gentile gatherings ended after someone made the mistake of scheduling a tea on the same day of a Star Trek gathering. The images boggle the mind ...

Occasionally or for periods of time I'll wander away from romances and read mysteries, historicals, biographies, fantasy (mostly Lord of the Rings imitators), bizarre novels like those by Christopher Moore--try Lamb or Coyote Blue for fun--or Carl Hiasson. Oh, and I actually read some literature--even some that wasn't required reading.

But I always end up back at romances. Why? I don't know ...

It's not that there's a much difference between the books. There are definitely conventions for all the genres and the plots, what there is of a plot, are mostly the same, though some authors handle world-creation, history and characters better then others. Some authors are just better writers and actually use lovely imagery and all those things writers are suppose to use, but often don't in mass market publishing because, well, no one expects to remember the novel.

Actually, they used to sell a bound book listing all the romance series novels, i.e., Harlequins, published so you could check them off, not risking accidentally buying the same book twice.

Yes, they're superficial, light, meaningless ... I often think of them as "bon bons for the mind" or "pick your fantasy for the day." I confess, though, I have a similar relationship to trashy novels as I do to chocolate: I know I should indulge in something more substantial, but give me my chocolate ... NOW.

They've discovered that dark chocolate is actually good for you--lowers blood pressure, releases endimorphins and just makes you feel yummy all over ... Maybe there's hope for romances.