The term romantasy annoys me. Mostly, because nobody knows what it means, but everybody acts like they just discovered it. While, as far as Im concerned, it has existed nearly forever just packed away in a genre most people did not think worth their time.

One of the problems with trying to talk about Romantasy is the lack of clear definition but I will link some articles that do a good job of describing what romantasy is and what some of its limitations are. Lets just say for our purposes here that romantasy is a story with significant elements of both fantasy and romance.

Now what may not be apparent from the nose-in-the-air way I have been talking about romantasy is that I am actually a big fan of it. I just resent feeling like I’m climbing on the bandwagon for a thing I have always loved. But it is why I feel entirely justified in dissecting a recent article, which aggravated me something terrible. And yes, I know it was probably just some clickbait by a two-bit hack, but I can’t let this level of arrant nonsense stand.

If you want to read the original, be warned the website permits one free view and thereafter will hide behind a ‘paywall’ where you have to sign-up to their newsletter to get another view. Thereafter they will fill your inbox with subtle variations on the same newsletter and it will take at least two tries to unsubscribe from them all. Just saying 😉

Sour Grapes

I want to start by addressing some of the more egregious comments directly and chronologically. Then we can get down into the underlying problems of this article.

She is is basically the Taylor Swift of Publishing

That was a back-handed compliment if ever I heard one. Also, I can’t really say I see the resemblance. Surely it’s got to do with more than both being female and successful? Someone please tell me that is not what the writer is complaining about.

Since when do young women like fantasy?”

Umm since forever? I have been reading them since I was an adolescent. The Terry Pratchett Biography describes women attendees at Science Fiction and Fantasy Conventions in the late 1960s. Ursula Le Guin published her first book in 1959.
Maybe you want to set aside your sexist stereotypes before critiquing a genre?

These books are straight-up filthy

Why is that a problem? Lots of books from many different genres feature explicit sex scenes and have done for decades. I mean if you don’t want on-page sex that’s fine, there is an entire genre devoted to that (they are called clean or closed-door or Heartwarming from Harlequin in case you were wondering).

[quote from Financial Times] …Tolkien-esque universe populated by sexually-charged fairies

A note to both the writer and the Financial Times – there are no fairies in Lord of the Rings.
And I ask again – what is wrong with that?

More of a resemblance to Anastasia Steele and Christian Grey than to Aragorn and Arwen

There is so much wrong with this statement, but I want to unpack the whole 50-shade comparison in more detail a little later, so bear with me

A female protagonist who is no older than 20 but no younger than 17. She is visibly malnourished, but in a cute way where she is skinny but still outrageously beautiful

I challenge you. Go find me any genre fiction written in the 1990s or 2000s (when Maas 1st started publishing) to which this statement does not apply. I will wait here.
The real question is whether the author is protesting the continuation of unhealthy beauty standards or if she just feels like the beautiful lead is unbelievable?
And am I the only person who feels like the idea of a female protagonist in a fantasy series is mind altering to this writer?
While we are on this subject, I would also like to challenge the assumption that the protagonist must be female. I could name many books I consider fitting the genre that have male protagonists (and love interests, while we are on the subject).
Also, the age category: this is the definition of Young Adult, and while we could debate the authenticity of romantasy, the author cannot possibly challenge that one. And again, there are many romantasies with older casts
Captive Prince Trilogy by CS Paccat, supports both my assertions. And I will fight to the death anyone who suggests that is not a romantasy

Despite her severe lack of personality, a prophecy decrees that she will be greater and more special than everyone else

A lead with no personality can allow the reader to project themselves into the space. If you want proof of the success of that ploy have another read of the Narnia books.
Also have you heard of something called the Hero’s Journey?
Are we really arguing about prophesies now? Because Dune was a book entirely about prophesies. Harry Potter had both a plain-Jane protagonist and a prophesy. And I would argue that in Lord of the Rings the quest to destroy the ring held the same place in the narrative as a prophesy (nobody knew for certain if the task could be completed or if it would be enough to destroy Sauron)

[the love interest] looks like the love child of [Legolas] and Satan and he is usually the fated mate of the female protagonist

Ummm, if it’s a book then how do you know? But thanks for the explicit description of your sexual fantasy man. It was just what I needed with my morning coffee.
In my experience fated mates is a trope strictly related to paranormal romances featuring werewolves and the like, are we saying those books are romantasy? Because then the term really does have no meaning

All names must be unnecessarily hard to pronounce

LOL, babe – That. Is. The. Point. It’s part of the fun. And the truth is nobody really cares all that much.
This alone is proof this author does NOT read fantasy books

There must be at least one extremely long and graphic sex scene that would make the people riding the subway with you deeply uncomfortable

Why the fuck are you reading this out loud on the subway?!
Also, there is only 1 sex scene? That really is not a filthy book. Girl, you need to get out more

Book title formula [I will spare you the long rant the writer gave on the subject]

Umm, honey, I hate to point this out but the Game of Thrones books follow that formula, and nobody in their right mind has suggested that GRR Martin is writing romantasies. It is something that was very popular with the intense high fantasy books of the late 1990s and 2000s. As a reader I have always taken it to mean ‘strap in these books will consume your life

Basic map no one will use or reference at any point

Personally, I agree, maps are pointless. But I have plenty of friends who love the maps and would be very upset if the book didn’t come with a map. So, you know, to each his own

For plot reasons, there must be an all-powerful, supernatural villain

Umm, yes? That’s how you make drama? I will refer you once again to Dune and the Baron-whatever-his-name-was, or Voldemort or Sauron…

Sexy elves never hurt

I am assuming here she means they never show emotional vulnerability: Actually, quite often they do. But it tends to show sub textually, in keeping with the protagonist’s viewpoint and character arch

Her muscle-bound fairy lords, oversexed elves, and aroused werewolves

Is she describing Maas’ books or the average paranormal?

The doom-and-gloom, aiming her career at the ice-berg, tone in the last few lines of the article is really over the top.

And we need to acknowledge the dumbest table ever formatted. The writer went so far as creating a table comparing one of Maas’ books to the Lord of the rings (and to 50-shades). And I am left gobsmacked by what she imagined any of these books had in common. Or what she thought a reader would get out of a comparison between them. It feels to me like the table is there to show she read the books: “Look mom I did my homework!”. It is padding and misleading as hell, a waste of the reader’s time.

Losing the Plot

Ok time for the big stuff.

First, we need to acknowledge that this article is not about romantasy. It is a mean-spirited attack on the work of Sarah J. Maas. A person whose success and perpetual position on the New York Times Bestseller list the writer appears to greatly resent. Maas’ work is the only example given of romantasy in the entire article, even though it’s supposedly this exploding genre. Now I must raise my hand here and admit, that I have not read any of Maas’ books, they have simply never appealed to me. So, I am not going to try challenge direct assertions about the books. But the writer claims that “her success lies in her adherence to a core set of romantasy tropes” (most of which are challenged above). The statement implies that all Maas’ and by extension, romantasy books, follow a strict formula. To which I say a) that cannot possibly be true and b) why does it matter?

Maas’ work are all series of connected books with the same protagonist. Who might start where the writer described in book 1, but the books that follow must continue the arc. The writer has rather shown that she only ever read the one book. There is nothing inherently bad about writing books to a formula, if the content is still done well and the readers get what they are expecting. It’s one of the oldest and most snooty complaints ‘serious’ authors make regarding romance books. And really its past time that this stopped.

Since we have drifted onto the topic of romance books. 50-shades of Grey is neither a good nor a typical romance. It should under no circumstances whatsoever be assumed to represent the genre. Most commentators agree that the writing is abysmal, there is barely a plot and no character arc or growth for the protagonist. But the real issue with the book is that the relationship shown is widely considered abusive. It does not understand consent and hangs into very old-fashioned ideas of gender roles. There are better commentators than me to talk through all the ways this book is problematic. It is very important in considering 50-shades against other books to understand the difference between an author trying to depict a enemies-to-lovers, grouchy man with a heart of gold, against what happened in 50-shades. Its inclusion in this article is obvious click-baiting. But I am wondering whether the writer understands those differences herself.

And now I have an appeal for all writers discussing romantasy – Stop comparing it to Lord of the Rings, I’m begging you! First of all, if LoR is the only fantasy book your audience is familiar with then maybe they are asking the wrong question. And secondly its so far removed from romantasy that the comparison is rendered useless. There is no sex in LoR, the only romance barely covers half-a-page. Romantasies may use some “Tolkien-esque” tropes, but that’s because those things have become fantasy tropes. My feeling is, if we are going to try discuss romantasy meaningfully (or even just agree on a definition) then we should be comparing oranges to other citrus. Compare it to fantasy Mills & Boons, to small-town witch romances, and to werewolf and vampire, fated-mates, paranormal romances. And then let us skip over to epic fantasy and discuss how much romance the story actually needs. The inability to see how different romantasies are from LoR is a deeply questionable aspect of the article.

We also need to acknowledge the writers apparent blind-spot when it comes to the place of queer stories in driving the fascination with romantasy.

So, reach a somewhat rambling conclusion. The writer, in attempting to show her ‘expertise’ and offer a biting critique of romantasy, instead shows us her lack of familiarity with both the romance and fantasy genres. She makes no separation between a depiction of domestic abuse from romance. And she spends a remarkable amount of her word-count bashing common fantasy tropes. In short, she has somehow turned romantasy, a term which (let’s remember) nobody can define, into a short-hand for the entire fantasy genre. Thats a special level of stupid.

There is nothing wrong with not liking fantasy or romance or for that matter romantasy (although if you didn’t like either of the former I cant imagine what you thought you would get out of the latter). The world is full of books to sample and enjoy. But I would suggest you might enjoy more of them if you stopped being so judgemental.