Romance Fiction Myths & Facts
Audience, Appeal and Interest in Romantic Novels May Suprise
Debunking myths of the 'typical' romance fiction reader with survey results from Romance Writers of America, and some intriguing, fascinating facts!
It has long been a source of frustration for romance readers that no other reader of genre fiction is so stereotyped and mocked as the reader of romance fiction. Read mystery novels or thrillers and you’re tolerated, if looked at with a little suspicion; read science fiction and the worst criticism leveled at you is that you’re a geek. But dare to pick up a novel with a bare-chested hunk clasping a gal with ample bosoms on the cover and the world will sneer that you are a desperate housewife with the IQ of a kumquat.
Readership surveys don’t support the lingering image of a woman with too much time on her hands, eating bonbons while reclining in a satin peignoir. Romance readers have little leisure time; what time they do have, they want to spend pleasurably, and that means losing themselves in the pages of a well-written, engaging romance novel.
Myths and facts:
- Romance readers read for the smut: While it’s true that many romance novels have explicit descriptions of love scenes, many more don’t. Romance fiction comes in many hues of blue, from the ‘celestial blue’, chaste representations of spiritual love in inspiration romance fiction, to the gritty indigo of erotica, with every shade in between. Readers who do read novels with explicit love scenes don’t buy them for that reason; however, sexual contact is as much a part of real life as working and conversing, so it is represented within the pages of a romance novel.
- Romance readers are frustrated old cat-lady spinsters: Actually, most female romance readers are married; the most recent readership survey on the RWA (Romance Writers of America) website indicates that 50% are married, 8% widowed, 4% divorced and 1% separated. Also, 75% are under the age of 54. And 22% of romance readers are men! This is not to imply that male readership is necessary to garner respect for any genre, it’s just one more fact that goes against the stereotype.
- Romance readers are stupid: This notion needs to be addressed. If we attack it by framing intelligence and education together – they aren’t necessarily the same thing, but just for a frame of reference - then the RWA readership survey has more interesting news. 23% of readers responding to the RWA survey reported having ‘only’ a high school diploma, while 42% have a bachelor’s degree or higher!
- Romance readers need a life: romance readers have lives, which is why they read romance novels. The average woman’s life is full to overflowing; she often has a job outside the home, and has to juggle that against responsibilities to her children, spouse, parents, in-laws and friends, and has to fit in time for cooking, cleaning, and keeping herself in some kind of adequate repair. Those who don’t have a job outside of the home juggle additional responsibilities, such as caring for other people’s children, caring for elder parents, volunteer positions, etc. Romance novels allow the reader an ‘escape’ yes, but it’s not an escape from an empty life, rather it’s a break from a life too full, and overwhelming, at times. Reading romance fiction allows women – and many more men than admit it; see #2 – to ‘de-stress’ from the outside world. Others may retreat to watching sports or movies; romance readers read a good book instead.
For the complete RWA survey results visit: RWA Readership Survey
It’s clear from the survey results that long-held notions about romance fiction and the readers who enjoy it are not only misleading, but almost exactly the reverse of reality. I
In terms of sales, according to a 2006 Simba (RWA says that Simba is ‘an independent market research firm that studies the publishing industry’) report, romance fiction accounted for over 26% of the book market, including all genres and types of books. That's an impressive number. Romance fiction is a strong and vital force in the publishing world today, just as it has been for decades.
