Friday, June 20, 2008

Boots in the Bedroom: M&B vs. Jane Austen

Let me say from the outset that paperback novels aren't my poison. Mr. Knightly or Mr. Darcy will do me much more long term harm than any Mr. Mills and Boon Hunk ever could, but still, it's far from edifying reading.

At this stage for me, there is a natural limiting factor for M&B. I read one this afternoon and afterwards felt as I would if I'd gobbled a whole packet of banana lollies. One more page and I'd be sick. But as with lollies, if I kept on, my palette would get used to it and soon I'd be able to handle and even want more. I have no natural limit with Jane Austen. I can read the same novel many times over and then another and then another and feel no worse. Meanwhile, my grip on reality may have slipped away...

But Mills and Boon and Jane Austen are not the same. Sorry Ben. They're just not.

Today I bought 3 Mills and Boon romances: Scandals and Secrets, A Man For Mum, and Boots In The Bedroom. My surpassing godliness caused me to avoid buying the books marked 'sexy romances' so this discussion will be limited to the softer M&B novels*. This afternoon I read Boots In The Bedroom because it was the shortest. Let me tell you about it.

Gina is a well off and very attractive 28yo computer programmer from Sydney. She unwillingly travels to a remote property in rural Queensland to install computer equipment and design software. While there, she stays with Ultra Hunk Parish Some-one-or-other. For the first seven chapters they don't get along, but at the same time are drawn to eachother in an inexplicable and uncontrollable physical passion... In chapters eight through to fifteen, they have sex. Over and over again. And again. And again. (It's exhausting.) He loves her but she's not willing to say she loves him, even though he takes her to the highest heaven over and over again, and again and again and ...you get the idea. She gets in a plane to fly home, realises that she loves him after all, gets out of the plane and then they... (you guessed it!). In the epilogue we find that she stays there forever, they have a baby and they go on having fantastic sex.

While they are only physically intimate for the second half of the book the writer goes to lengths to explain the force of their attraction from their first meeting. The first half of the book is largely descriptions of the physical effect they have on eachother. No details are left to the imagination. It's kind of sweet how we have a paragraph from his point of view - what she looks like, what he feels, what he'd like to do to her, followed immediately by a similar paragraph from her point of view.

I was going to give you a few choice quotes, but I won't. I think my blog is already at risk of being flagged by what I've written so far. If you'd like to read Boots, with your spouse's permission I'll send it to you and you can read it for yourself.

At this point I should give a brief summary of a Jane Austen novel. I won't because I can't be bothered. Everyone has read one anyway. Ben, basically the difference between JA and M&B is that well over half a M&B novel is spent describing sex. I don't think the figure's that high in Jane Austen. In M&B the girl and boy characters and threads of plot are just there to provide a framework in which sex can happen. Not so in JA. Is that enough?

Well, that's basically it. I'd like to do a couple more posts on M&B now that I've taken the trouble to read one. Perhaps on why women consume them, why they appeal to so many, and what that tells us about ourselves. Any other ideas?

* given what this novel was like, I shudder to think what would be inside a 'sexy' romance!

14 comments:

  1. :) Thanks Simone. I think that's enough said for me. I think I can infer that M & B is not for the single. I was beginning to wonder where you'd gone by the way so it's nice to see you back ...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Ali. I've been a little busy and haven't felt that I've had all that much to say lately.

    But now... I'm brimming with blog posts! Stay tuned!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great post... but I've got to put my hand up as never having read a Jane Austin ...or watched a TV series, or seen a movie...

    ReplyDelete
  4. You've never read or watched a Jane Austen???!

    But how do you know what's important to women? How have you survived this long?

    Don't worry, I'll help you catch up. Read my next few posts.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well I am still single...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Don't you think its funny how the BBC version of Pride and Prejudice can't resist adding its own little M&B type scene- any ladies reading will automatically know the one.... yes, the one where Mr Darcy, consumed by his hot passion for Lizzy, dives into the cold pond and emerges complete with white shirt clinging to his six pack! The thought of Jane Austen writing such a scene gives me the giggles every time!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Simone (and all!)
    Looking forward to your posts on this - fascinating!
    A friend of mine did her PhD on Australian romance fiction. She had been a very senior librarian for many years and was interested in the fact that while M&B-style books were incredibly popular, they were treated with an incredible contempt by both men and women (most of whom had never read one). She was not a fan of the genre herself, but she thought it was curious that reading a M&B for fun was generally more socially unacceptable among the literary classes than reading Playboy or James Bond-style action lit. She wrote a really interesting book about it - it's called 'From Australia with Love', by Juliet Flesch.
    Re. your example of Boots in the Bedroom one of the things Juliet found was that romance fiction really, really changes over time. Apparently in the 90s there were lots of high-powered career women whose hunky men just fitted in to their busy lives, whereas more recently there has been a huge swing back to more traditional roles, where the woman gave up her job as soon as she got married to the dream man.
    She also found some really interesting examples of M&B which dealt with quite unusual topics - for example, a married couple trying to restore their relationship after the death of their child. So there is certainly a range out there!
    I have several copies of Juliet's book, if you'd like me to bring one up when we visit in a couple of weeks!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks Jo. I would like to read that book. I remember you mentioning it ages ago.

    I'm fascinated by the Mills and Boon phenomenon. Women really do get into them. Many read several a week - or more. They are clearly tapping into something.

    I've read 4 M&B properly. A couple of years ago on holidays at Caloundra I read 3 'sweet romances' back to back and did a bit of analysis. They were all written in the same year and followed precisely the same formula, almost down to the page. (Halfway down page four introduce hero, explain her initial physical response to him...) It is interesting that all of them mentioned a pregnancy or baby on the last page. I think babies are seen as something that cement the relationship (married or not) and bring it all into the life of the reader - reader is probably at home with kids herself.

    I would like to study the genre more but won't be reading many more M&B's because the descriptions of sex (although so unrealistic that it's funny) are really unhelpful.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sounds like a really good read. Boots In tHE Bedrrom.. what a title. I am very curious about "A Man For Mum" too-- that sounds like a ripper, and right up my alley.

    The stuff about how formulaic M and B is to me sounds pretty reminiscent of Austen though still. Okay, I will concede there are big differences between Austen and M&B and that one is well written and one not-- but still. Maybe a different formula, but a formula just the same. And Michelle is right about that pond scene. Any film with that scene in it can't be held up on too high a pedestal.

    But I enjoyed your review, and admire youre tenacity to actually try and get through one of those suckers and manage to keep your lunch down.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ben, the problem was that it wasn't hard to get through. Slipped down like fairy floss. Maybe compare it to watching that really tacky movie that you know you shouldn't be watching but don't quite want to turn off...

    Both JA and M&B are female genres. Plot is not the major thing. Characters and relationships are. So you'd imagine there to be some similarities. But in 200 years time no one will be reading 'Boots in the Bedroom.'

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ben, I really think you need to read the books. After all, the fact that a guy and a girl get together after a certain amount of tension is hardly a reason to dismiss something as formulaic - it describes most of Shakespeare! He's hardly gone down in history as the author of chick-lit!
    The secret of Jane Austen, I think - almost entirely lost in the moviees - is that she manages to combine the political and the personal in extremely thoughtful ways. That is, she's writing about what it is like for people when their society or their personal circumstances restrict their options in incredibly frustrating ways. Most of these people are women, but quite a lot of them are men. And Jane Austen is interested in how you can be good or content when you are in such a situation - when you are never allowed to say what you really think, when your family is just infuriating, when you are facing a life of poverty - and yet there are no other options really available to you. For Austen's women, the issue is that marriage to someone who doesn't dislike them is almost the only way out of such a life. Marriage to someone they love is transformative. So marriage in Jane Austen's novels is rarely just about girly romance, it is about rescue from a life of restriction, poverty and (usually) the contempt of spinsterhood in those times.
    But alongside this political issue of the threat of poverty and marginalisation that most of Jane Austen's heroines (except Emma!) face is the brilliant personal characterisation. And again, the recent movies have failed miserably on this front. Because Jane Austen's people are real - they are flawed, and their flaws matter. You can tell that Austen really believed in sin, and that she wrote about the way seemingly personal sins of character - like greed or vanity - can take over a person and do enormous harm to a family or community. In Jane Austen, people actually rebuke each other for sinful behaviour! Now that's not something you'll see in too many Hollywood romances! All of this is brought out in the books, to a degree that the most recent films don't even attempt to deal with, and yet that's why people - men and women - have loved them over the years.
    NB. of course, the idea that women like reading romances and men don't is a rather odd modern invention. Back in the day, literary males spent most of their time composing love poems and romantic epics. And they were guys who carried swords and ate their meat raw!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Would you believe I did an assignment on these types of novels at Uni? I think I read (or at least skim read) 52 of them. Didn't take me very long. . .

    ReplyDelete
  13. wow sarah! am I on the right track?

    ReplyDelete