One of the perks of my job is access to upcoming releases before they’re released. Every day, I look at Edelweiss and NetGalley and check out what’s coming out in the near future. This means I have a pretty good sense of what publishers and authors think will sell in 2025. And maybe they’re right. Here’s what you have to dread look forward to.
Romantasy. If you are still jonesing for books with magic, star crossed lovers, and leads who appear immune to injury, 2025 will be the year for you. The number of romantasy books being published and pushed dwarfs any other genre.
Dark Academia. Clearly readers miss Harry Potter–publishers are putting out tons of books set in magical schools where death is a test or crap wizard away. Most of these books also seem to be enemies to lovers–if you’ve always dreamed of Hermione being dominated by Draco, this year’s releases will be your jam.
Female rage. I’ve seen blurbs for books where shit men are targeted by smart women who HAVE HAD ENOUGH, several of which seem to be comfortable with murder as revenge for being an asshat bro. And it’s not just anger at men–if you want to read about the rich and powerful being taken down a notch or ten, you’ll find many such stories.
Cinnamon roll/Beta heroes. Alpha, in mainstream publishing, is declining and nice guys who treat everyone in their lives with care and compassion and kindness are filling the void. Many of them also love animals, the great outdoors, and/or crafting.
Mysteries with a SHOCKING twist. The twisty mystery is all the rage–never mind that it’s often counterproductive to a sand plot. If you’re dreaming of books where, at least once as you read, you have a NO F*CKING WAY moment, 2025 is your year.
Small town contemporary romance. In romance, this year, not only can you go home again, if you do, you’ll find your true love–if you’re lucky, you’ll have a meet cute at the farmer’s market/your old summer camp/a struggling but plucky fruit farm.
Cozy mysteries. These appear to be growing in number–many, of course, with terrible puns for titles.
What do you think the romance/women’s fiction/mystery trends will be this year? Do they excite you? Are there things you’re firmly not interested in? What are you looking forward to?
Ouch! It looks like I may be reading more thrillers this year and re-reading my DIKs, etc. What you are describing seems like a load of C- level or avoid totally stuff for me but, who knows. I may be amazed and surprised at what eventually appears. (And there is always the hope that Diana Gabaldon will publish No 10 in the Outlander series this year and not make me wait too much longer!)
To me, it also shows how much publishers love trends – the romantasy and dark academia books aimed at the Potter/Maas crowd, the female rage/shocking twist crowd born of Gone Girl. Cozies have always been a fairly steady market – I’ve been reading them (some) since the 80s. None of this is a surprise but it does show why people complain of books being same old-same old. Publishers aren’t willing to take the risks that will spawn the next Potter/Gone Girl.
What shocks me (and will probably always shock me because I don’t read them) is the lasting strength of the small-town myth. From Hallmark movies to romances, this fantasy has held strong for decades. And it is both counterintuitive and counter-cultural (studies show small towns are dying, and the NY Times even had a recent article on how their decline has impacted the last few elections). I guess the nostalgia runs deep for some readers, and all I can say is, move to a small town for a while. See how you like having the whole community (except for the occasional dive bar) closed at eight at night. Die of something they’d catch at an average suburban hospital. Enjoy the good time of knowing everyone is minding your business – and not in a helpful way. In a nice, judgy, disparaging way. Experience the joy of reliving high school well into your fifties cause that’s when most people peaked. Oh, what fun! People aren’t just leaving cause of jobs.
I don’t mean to sound so disparaging, but the small-town mythos, is different than the fantasy many other novels sell. Sure, it is ridiculous for the most popular boy in school (who also happens to be rich, exceptionally smart, and incredibly mature and deep) to fall for the wallflower who isn’t exceptional (except, of course, there is something under the surface that makes her totally awesome) but most of us recognize that for the feel-good story it is. The small-town mythos tend to be treated like a reality and includes a subtle slur against the big city, where people are mean, nasty, criminal etc. There is also a subtle (or not so subtle) racism woven into them since city centers tend to have a more thriving minority population, so there is an inherent idea that anywhere “those people” are in large numbers is bad.
Again I get the fantasy. We all want a community that pulls together, where we are known and loved, where we feel safe and secure and have deep roots. And that myth can be done right in a small town setting as well as in a ton ballroom or anywhere else. I just feel we need to be sure there is a clear-eyed look at how it is presented and why it might be so popular among certain groups. And I know that of which I speak. I grew up in a community where our high school’s biggest club was Future Farmers of America, my husband comes from an even smaller town, and I lived for several years in a community whose population was under 10 thousand.
Do you watch Shrinking? It is the Cheers for our time in that it showcases a group of people who are welcome ANY TIME to wander into each others homes and workplaces. I think it’s so popular–Ted Lasso was like this too–because we all want that feeling of constantly being seen, known, supported, and loved by a group. That is, I think, the lure of the small town.
I haven’t seen that, although Cheers came to mind when I was writing my post because it is a great example of creating that small environment feeling in a larger space.
I read this and was nodding my head SO vigorously, Maggie, it made me dizzy! Small-town romances just aren’t my thing for many of the reasons you state, but also because I think the US small town experience is so different to the UK one, and I just can’t relate.
Well, if Midsomer Murders is anything to go by, the UK version is a lot more deadly 🙂
Yes. More murderers and fewer cupcake bakeries!
The cupcake bakery is the one thing I wish was real. If you want cupcakes, the grocer is pretty much your only option in a small town, unless you get lucky and the coffee shop makes a few.
I think there is much to love about economically successful small towns. Big cities tend to make loneliness much worse for those who live there and aren’t plugged into a community. There is no perfect place to live but, no matter where you live, being able to support yourself and those you love is a necessary thing for joy.
My understanding is that the loneliness epidemic is not geographic. I think we might also have a different idea of a small town. I am thinking of the rural communities, not places like Madison, WI, which is not the biggest city in the state but has three Walmarts, all within a 20-30 minute drive of each other. Places with one Walmart to serve a fifty mile+ radius. Or places so small they don’t merit a Walmart and have a Ben Franklin or the equivalent. These are the spots that show up in those books most of the time.
I agree. Economically successful is the key. There are successful small towns all around the country. These usually have some quality that makes them fun and viable, like historic sites that draw tourists, a body of water or other fun vacation activity that isn’t huge, but attracts a niche market, like some stops along the Appalachian Trail, or is a town with a small but successful college. I’m sure there are other examples, like Lexington, VA or Staunton VA, and small coastal towns. Unfortunately it doesn’t take much traveling by car to see all the small towns that are much less than ideal, who have drug problems rivaling cities and nothing for teens/young people to do. We drive through a dozen of these towns between here and Tidewater, VA, which is only about 175 miles. You’re more likely to drive through (or around) one of these than to experience the small town with a vibrant main street with a gourmet bakery.
FYI, I just read that the most common definition of a small town iin the U.S, is a population of 5000 or under. But I think it’s safe to say some towns somewhat larger than that would be considered “small” by most people. For example, I’d consider Hillsboroug, NC (with a main drag that has a handmade chocolate shop, good restaurants and some art space) a small town, but it has a population of around 10,000 people.
Here on the other side of the pond, “small town” settings would be “village life” stories and so maybe I react to them differently. There is a perceived desire (and sometimes status) for living in villages in the UK, getting away from huge, often dirty, crowded, impersonal and crime-ridden cities so that a family can live in a semi-rural area of great peace, tranquility and beauty. The English countryside is often so beautiful – though admittedly not without some problems.
I grew up in greater Los Angeles but since my late 20s, I have lived in rural and small town England where the life in these environments is often much loved and relished. So many, many British authors across all genres have made successful careers depicting life in small village communities. I can think of books like those from Dorothy Sayers, Joanna Trollope (her delightful “Aga Sagas”) to Jilly Cooper (fab rural Rutshire), Ann Cleeves (Vera and Shetland) that have been part of some of the most loved fiction here and across the world.
I guess your perception of life in a small community is very different than mine. When my husband died two years ago, suddenly without any warning and in very difficult circumstances, the tiny village of 300 people we lived in rallied round and helped and supported me in more ways than I can count. I now live in a town of around 50,000 not far from that village, closer to amenities that I will need as I grow older for life on my own but I still feel very, very strong ties to that village and my friends there and can honestly say I knew by name all 300 residing there.
Just maybe, on consideration Maggie, the difference here is that I chose to live in a tiny village; I was not born into it thus it was a choice and, for me and my husband, it was the best choice possible for us both and we loved and thrived in it.
And a PS, as far as books set in small town America, I still recall with great fondness the Conard County series by Rachel Lee.
In the U.S., villages and small towns have different definitions, and it would matter in terms of services, tax zones, voting zones, etc. A small town requires a minimum population of 2,500 people. I haven’t really seen a village used in anything except an English-set WWII novel. However, the small-town novels in American romance that we are talking about have a different setup.
I lived in university towns and in suburbs of New England and Mid-Atlantic states. University towns were the best in giving you a sense of belonging especially if you were a student or an employee at the university or lived in the town. For me, it was always pleasant to run into someone from the university at the grocery store or coffee shop. And there were so many programs, concerts, plays etc offered by the university that I was never bored.
New England suburbs were the worst in community building or giving you a sense of belonging. Boston suburbs were the at the bottom. Watching Cheers was depressing, to think that that I had to go to a bar to know somebody or someone to know me. Connecticut is mostly rural, except for Hartford, Stamford and Bridgeport. It is intentionally kept so and homes in rural areas are zoned to be built on 1+ acre lot and I never saw anyone walking over to the fence and chatting with a neighbor. The whole set up was meant to discourage any kind of neighborliness. Again, idyllic community portrayed by Gilmore Girls was a myth except in one way—the show did not have a single person of color and Connecticut towns (except big cities) are almost all white. In Connecticut, one really had to drive 30 miles to get to a good pizza place.
By the time I moved to New Jersey where I lived for 20+ years, raised a family and worked, I had realized that all suburban communities are exclusionary and that community-building, a sense of belonging are activity centered. I was a master gardener and made good friends via my master gardener groups or as an artist via artist groups. There was only one person I got to know in my town—my next door neighbor. He and I would chat across the fence during summer months while we worked on our yards. We would catch up with each other’s news and since he was a firefighter, he would keep me updated about all the goings on in the town. He appreciated that we were never bothered by his raucous backyard barbecues. We were good neighbors to each other.
Romance novels peddle any number of fantasies—in my weaker moments, I drink the coolaid of HEA. But the cozy rural/semi-rural idyllic myths, I will never buy.
Huh. I have friends who live in rural Connecticut–moved there after decades in NYC–and it is super neighborly. She’s a musician and has gotten so much support from her community.
My mom grew up in a small rural town in Virginia where many of her cousins still live. It is a phenomenal community. But, I think almost all communities are, to a certain extent, exclusionary. I live in a college town and it’s a great community for those connected to the university. It’s not a great place for those who are not.
Most university towns are midsized. I’ve seen a few romances set in those, but I’m not sure they would qualify as the small-town romances that make the above list. And bedroom communities (suburbs to the suburbs/midsized towns) can be awesome. Everyone at my grocery store knows me, and I have amicable relationships with the people at the library, post office, etc. And I think most of us are good at making communities within communities – you mentioned activity-based communities; a lot of people I know have location-based communities. I’ve been visiting the same places for over 20 years, so they know my face, my food preferences, etc. The Chinese restaurant I go to knows my voice when I call; I don’t even have to give my name!
I get what you are saying here, Maggie. (My dad grew up in a farming community with about 400 people. That town is barely hanging on today with 244 residents – and only because it has the only public school (K-12, with fewer than 100 total students enrolled) for miles around. It no longer has a grocery store – people drive 22 miles to a town of 1800 to shop a local grocery store. The closest Walmart is 70 miles away. It has no bank, one gas station, two bars and two cafes.) It would not make a very good setting for a “small town” romance. And it has all the issues you raise (everyone knows everyone, there are no “minorities” amongst its residents, and there really is no way for kids to remain in town and raise their own families).
I think you raise legitimate points about reading small-town romances critically; and thank you for the reminder to me as a reader to keep them in mind. But the same can be said of romances in general. I appreciate when reviewers here at AAR point out the lack of diversity, implied racism, the glossing over of issues that should be acknowledged, etc. in the books reviewed here.
I’m not arguing for simplistic, mindless Hallmark movie-type novels. I just posted elsewhere here at AAR about wanting more complexity in my romance novels. But there are authors who’ve provided me with hours of enjoyable reading set in smaller communities. As you mention, I do like the idea of communities coming together to support its members. (We could all use a little more that everywhere here in the U.S. at the moment.) And there are authors who do include or address some of the issues you raise as part of their plots: e.g. Cate C. Wells, Fearne Hill, Penny Reid, Abby Jimenez, Serena Bell, and Robin Carr have all written some personal favorites that I’ve tagged as “small town”. And I’d widen the scope of what it means to be considered a “small town” romance. I’d argue that Julie Anne Long’s beloved Pennyroyal series, NR Walker’s Red Dirt series, and Jay Hogan’s more recent ranch series set in New Zealand can also be read as “small town” romances.
I’m not arguing that it can’t be done well. 20 years ago, when Carr’s Virgin River came out, I absolutely adored it. (In fact, I had been reading Carr before she became popular and had loved her historical standalone novels from the 80s and her Grace Valley books from the early nones, so I was early on the VR bandwagon). I also think small community books, which create the small-town feel within a larger environment (Like Debbie MacCombers books set around a knitting shop or novels focused on book clubs, etc.) However, I think this is a moment in time when the American small-town mythos comes with some nasty baggage. I just can’t help thinking of things like “Try That in a Small Town” and the conversations that came up around it. Some people are determined to push the myth as reality and insist on codifying urban with all that is bad.
Well, nothing is ever black and white, right? There are great things about urban environs and great things about rural/semi-rural environs. And there are challenging things about both as well.
I have had a kid living in NYC for the past ten years. It’s a pretty soulless, tough life. On the other hand, my daughter lives in Denver which has been warm and welcoming. Like so much in life, YMMV no matter where you are.
I think it definitely can be YMMV in real life. I’ve moved several times, have lived in a town with a population of 2,003, and lived in another of 500,000. Both had good and bad things about them, both had good and bad people in them. The myths we build up around any experience can be dangerous though. It is fine for me, and others like me, to say we prefer living in mid-sized communities. It is another thing entirely for us to build up legends on the soullessness of anyone willing to live in a small town or the idea that monsters live in big cities, while carefully codifying the idea that people who don’t look and talk like us are a menace to any society. Having done a lot of non-fiction reading in recent years, it has been startling to me to discover the prejudices that lurked just under the surface of so much of what I see and read in the name of entertainment. That’s what I’m trying to address here. Not the idea that Midsomer Murders should be banned because it gives a false image of the dangers of village life (I’d hate if they banned such shows!) but I think it is important to understand the bigotry that underlies this particular myth. And some authors do do it well. Nor should we restrict them in any way. But I would argue to at least speak of the issue that grips the sub-genre in general. I’d compare it to the conversations we had that centered around rape in older romances. Only I find this far more dangerous because few, if any, would have argued rape was a good thing in real life, but this one is believed.
Good grief, how depressing. There’s absolutely nothing on that list that appeals to me even a little bit!
Thankfully, most of the books I read these days come from a group of excellent self-publishing authors who are able to write what they want to write without being forced into some kind of genre straightjacket.
Publishers are in business to make money, of course. But in the case of the big names, it seems they spend less of their profits these days looking for something new and different than they do looking to play it safe and just churn out more of the same.
Well, I think much of this is attributable to readers. Goodreads makes it clear there is an endless stream of people who don’t really care about smart plots or believable characters–they just want to be distracted and entertained.
I also wonder how many people actually read those books and how many are pulling the book club trick of skimming the text and showing up for the wine (or TikTok convo or whatever social media app they are on). It would explain why many books have adult content but aren’t written for adults who like to read.
I so wish you couldn’t write about a book on GR unless you’d actually, you know, read it!
I’m less concerned with 2025 reading trends than I am with attempts by the incoming administration to censor (or label as “pornographic”) romance & romance-adjacent books, particularly m/m, f/f, poly, dark, and anything that doesn’t toe the cis-het-m/f line. Perhaps I’m being an alarmist, but if Jeff Bezos’s spineless behavior since the election is any indication, we can’t expect Amazon to show any backbone when it comes to demands that they not sell “inappropriate” books. I hope I’m overreacting, but nothing about Trump Mach II is filling me with anything but dread.
/Dismounting soapbox now!
I hope not. That does seem unlikely to me. It’s my sense that if it makes money, it’s OK is likely to be the mantra.
I do think you will see a continued push to censor what is available in public libraries and schools, however. But that’s a local/state thing.
Watching from the other side of the Pond, I think the “for the sake of the children!” brigade don’t care about money, they just want to ban anything that doesn’t conform to their narrow world-view. Given that many of the authors of the books DDD is talking about are mostly indie/self-publishing, we’re not talking about big money – those authors are more vulnerable to the whims of the ‘zon and will find it very difficult to continue to write if they’re forced off that platform.
We’ll see. Silicon Valley is rarely prudish.
I think those self-published authors are making Amazon a BOATLOAD of money. Kindle Unlimited is basically a license to print money for Amazon. (I realize very few of the authors are making big money, but Amazon definitely is.) That is why we are all so unhappy with the quality of what they are putting on bookstore shelves. They are trolling what seems to be well reviewed at Amazon/GR – which is a self-defeating, circular problem because most of the reviewers are people who think great writing is being published by Kindle Unlimited. . . .
But Amazon will never give up their e-book book revenue; and they’ll use the First Amendment (rightly so) to protect it. Dabney is correct – it is libraries that are most at risk for being pressured to drop romance titles.
And schools. Big time in schools.
Yes, as I’ve said, book banning is going to accelerate in publicly funded places such as libraries and schools.
I see what you mean. On the other hand I think these small indie authors very much fit Amazon’s recent business model. Gone are the days where amazon wanted to sell fewer better quality items, and lose profit to the larger companies producing them. Now they prefer to be a platform for small resellers and indie authors, that can squeeze for profit more easily because they are small fry. Being a platform with a monopoly is what makes the most easy money (see Steam, Etsy…)
If they did indie authors too dirty it would provide an opportunity for the rise of a new platform, which wouldn’t be so bad in my opinion.
Maybe, but Amazon has such a stranglehold I can’t see it happening. But the problem is really that authors of queer romance and dark and erotic romance are looking over their shoulders for fear of being targeted by those who want to ban anything that doesn’t fit their version of “normal”.
I don’t think it will be Amazon that bans them. Queer books are going to be under threat in public spaces, however. The days where an elementary school could have I Am Jazz on its shelves are numbered in many states.
Yes, this.
I was one of those people who believed firmly, adamantly, emphatically that we would never overturn Roe v. Wade. I was wrong. So is it possible we are moving towards actual book banning? I don’t want to guess. And m/f romance fans shouldn’t feel too smug and secure – these novels have been called porn for a long time, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see restrictions being applied to them. Things could honestly go in any direction.
A lot of the complaints are ironically about M/F works, and the claim that cartoon covers are marketing porn to children.
And there are many readers complaining that cartoon covers make it impossible to gauge the heat level of the story – which I guess is the other side of the same coin.
I can’t think of anyone I know who actually is a fan of those covers. I suppose someone has to like them?
When they first came out (close to 30 years ago), they were used for contemporary rom-coms, which was a market at the time. Authors like Robin Wells (Ooh, la la), Emily Carmichael, and Rachel Gibson. So they were a signal I was about to read a light-hearted, possibly silly romance. I can still remember the first time I went into the bookstore on my way to the pool and grabbed one that looked good, which turned out to be an angsty historical. I was mildly angry for days and became far more careful about just pulling books off shelves in a hurry. Honestly, this is part of what has driven me to e-reading more. If I’m going to have to scour the internet for info on a book before buying, might as well skip the bookstore altogether.
Yeah, I remember them being kind of a big tool to bring in New Adult market into things.
I’ve seen them used on intense Mob romances of all things.
That’s just flat out ridiculous. These days you really can’t judge a book by its cover.
I’m with you on this and for this reason I intensely dislike the cartoon covers. I can’t wait for this trend to be done. For a while in the noughts and tens there were beautiful covers and now most are just plain ugly
There is a trend I’m seeing for covers that are just the book title with a patterned/interesting looking background. This is very common in upcoming romantasy and spicy contemporary romance. So, we’ll see.
There are a lot of authors – not just of queer romance – who are worried about that very thing. Calling romance “mommy porn” has been an annoying, condescending sort of (but not really) joke, but now there are many latching onto the “porn” part and taking it literally. Of course, they’ve never read an actual romance novel, but that doesn’t stop them clutching their pearls…
I thought Roe v. Wade would be overturned. The way it was written was never going to hold up to modern medicine. We need a different, clearer law that gives women and doctors control. I was also sure affirmative action would be overturned.
To me, we are living in a time that the real surprise is how little enthusiasm there is for voting for politicians who actually enact policies that reflect the wishes of the nation.
Do you believe Roe v Wade was overturned because of advances in modern medicine? Or, was it something else?
Definitely something else. Here it was overturned due to religion. The outrageous bans we are seeing in some states show that, IMO.
I agree—definitely misogynistic desire keep women barefoot and pregnant and at home. In contrast, just think of the most amazing turn around in Ireland regarding abortion, gay marriage etc. There is no other advanced industrial nation that is moving backwards like the US. Why???
That’s part of it. But, as RGB noted, Roe v. Wade rested on iffy legal ground, framing abortion as a matter of privacy as a right guaranteed in the constitution—a ruling that left the ruling exposed to relentless legal challenges from anti-abortion forces.
She stated that by legalizing abortion nationwide in one sweeping decision, the ruling short-circuited a political process already trending toward greater access. Instead of securing the right, it stalled legislative momentum and handed opponents a powerful rallying point, galvanizing the anti-abortion movement into a formidable force.
I’m with you, Dabney. When Reagan was first elected in 1980 (the first national election I was able to vote in, iirc) with a huge assist from the evangelical Christian community and a rallying cry of overturning Roe v. Wade, I was convinced the ruling woukd be overturned. The biggest surprise is that it took over 40 years to accomplish it. It pains me to say it, but I think gay marriage and access to birth control will be the next items on the chopping block. Sometimes I’m glad I’m old.
Well, the interesting thing about overturning Roe v. Wade is that, unlike allowing undocumented immigrants to stay in the country or mandating affirmative actions–both are very unpopular with the vast majority of voters–overturning a woman’s right to abortion is not popular. Overturning gay marriage or banning birth control are both wildly unpopular. So either we will truly give up being a democracy or those rights will stay because the politicians who make policy will lose their positions at the ballot box.
Well, I’m a little confused here. Roe v. Wade may have been settled on iffy legal grounds, with odd justifications. That’s not so peculiar; the wording/justification of many of our laws can be downright bizarre (John Oliver, Seth Meyer, and Jon Stewart have all done great segments on weird laws in America and why they happen). However, most people I know did not want it overturned. Especially young people. My understanding (and I could be wrong here) from living in the Christian community is that the whole Supreme Court issue and the Roe v.Wade issue were balms to the Evangelicals for having to vote for someone as morally corrupt as Trump. They needed something to justify doing so and got it in how he is standing up for Christians by giving them a Supreme Court that will moralize us back into a Christian Nation. But only a small segment of Christians felt strongly about abortion. A bigger bunch feels more strongly about the Trans and LGBTQ+ groups. So I don’t see how that let that stand during a second Trump presidency. But again, I’ve been wrong about these things before.
Most legal scholars I know all think Roe v. Wade was, in many ways, a legal mistake for the reasons RGB articulated. But, whether or not it was iffy, it was popular. It was overturned primarily by the conservative courts–this is a strategy the Catholic and Evangelical Churches came up when the law was passed, stacking the courts, all the way to the Supreme Court, with pro-life judges. It is an unpopular thing, just not unpopular enough to elect the two candidates the Democratic Party put up for the Presidency. How it will play out in politics–actual elections–over the next few years is unclear although, thus far, being pro-choice wins more than being pro-life.
I agree that many conservatives want to take on queer rights–which, I will say, historically have not been trans rights. The right to gay marriage is supported by over 70% of Americans. Will they care enough to vote to keep it enshrined? We’ll see.
Trans rights are much less popular. A majority of Americans do not want people to be able to use bathrooms that match their gender identity, do not want minors to be able to use puberty blockers, or allow trans athletes to play on sports teams that match their gender identity. I think you will see many laws legislating the later three issues and, indeed, many laws enacted that argue there are just two genders pass all over the US and many will not be unpopular vis a vis the majority of voters.
Does that mean that laws that abolish gay marriage and access to birth control will also pass? Even if they are unpopular voters? (Over 90% of Americans believe birth control should be legal and easy to obtain.) I’m skeptical. But if the Democratic Party doesn’t find a way to reach the hearts and minds of the majority of voters, it’s possible.
No matter the legal grounds, a woman’s right to choose should be a settled matter two decades into 21st century. It cannot and should not be a matter of legal debate left to individual states.
I agree. But Roe v. Wade was not that legal mandate.
That is one depressing list. This may be the year I reread War and Peace or Kristen Lavransdatter. What I long for is a book with an interesting plot and interesting characters. I’m tired of books that are too much like supermarket cupcakes — sweet and pretty but bland and flavorless.
Non of this really appeals to me personally it seems like the publishing industry is trying to appeal to younger demographic as well like new adult age range.
To be honest, I think it’s always been like that and it’s that way for almost everything. Once you (as a woman) hit 40 (and I’m well past that!) it’s like there’s nothing out there for you.
But I don’t get it. Everywhere you look there are news articles about falling birthrates and about how younger people are so squeezed financially – when are companies going to wake up to the fact that the larger part of their audiences are not the twentysomethings?
I’m not even in my 40s yet and I feel this way not sure if it’s the age’s of the characters or if the writing ls just bad and feels immature .Most writers seem to be unable to produce a story and characters that are complex and interesting. I’m commenting this as a millennial that grew up on Harry potter and still enjoyings reading it .I go back to it now and again because Rowling is a great writer.
I’ve been thinking a lot about Rowling’s work–my husband and I just watched ALL eight movies (He’d never seen them.) and during Covid, I listened to all the books. Not only is her imagination simply astonishing, her willingness to make her characters deeply flawed and to kill off adored characters makes her work have a depth so much of genre fiction is missing. We, as readers, were pretty damn sure Harry, Hermione, and Ron would survive and that Voldemort would ultimately be defeated but, whoa, getting there was rough. Which is a gift.
I loved that Rowling’s books felt so realistic. Children do not grow up in a world where adults can protect them from everything, where wars don’t have casualties, where parents don’t have pasts (think of James and how Harry had to reconcile himself to the fact that he probably wouldn’t have liked him as a teenager) and where teachers all love them. It was so wonderful to read a set of books that were ultimately hopeful without painting a picture of a flawless world.
YES! And one in which our heroes are flawed–there are long stretches of time where Harry and Ron are both asshats–and villains can have our sympathy–poor Draco in the last two books.
Speaking of flawed characters I’m currently reading Not quite a husband by Sherry Thomas I’m thinking I know I shouldn’t like Leo because he’s terrible to Bryony but somehow she makes you like him he’s charming but at the same time very flawed, what a talented writer she is. Probably something else that would never get published today ,I’ve seen a lot of readers complain about that book and give it a negative review but I’m really liking it so far.
I love Sherry Thomas’ early romances. Leo is a great hero and one that would would be hard to make work now–he knows better than Bryony does what is right for her.
Have you read Private Arrangements?
I’ve not read Private arrangements yet I’ve only read The luckiest lady in London.And yes Leo today if written would probably have to be toned down quite a lot.
I think all of Sherry’s HR heroes would have been toned down quite a lot in today’s climate if they were written at all. Fitz would definitely not have been written
This depresses me. Romance should have space for profoundly redemptive arcs. You can’t have a redemption if there isn’t a very real fall. Ravishing the Heiress is a gorgeous novel, one in which true love, the stuff we dream of, rises from the abyss to friendship and then, wonderfully, to passion and love.
I want more leads like Fitz!
Ravishing the Heiress is one of my all time favourite HRs. I’m sure you’re right that it wouldn’t have been published today, which is a crying shame. It seems there is little room for nuance or complexity in many of today’s popular romances. Or, rather, that readers don’t want those things so authors aren’t writing them.
There does seem to be a desire for 21st century characters in period dress amongst many readers
Do we really think that we are better people than those of 20 years ago? To me, it’s not about that we are now asking for 21st century characters as much as we have decided our heroes need to be flawless at heart. Even more frustrating, they have to signal their perfection by their participations in social movements, vocal support for the rights of all, etc…. I am all for participating in social movements and speaking up for the disenfranchised AND I do not need every hero or heroine to be doing both in spades. Again, if you begin as a truly admirable person, you don’t have very far to go to redeem yourself and I do love a good redemption arc.
I know people have all kinds of different expectations for characters when they read, but I just wish a balance could be struck where readers who prefer 21st century characters get their desires and those who don’t also get what they want. With the way things seem to be going, I don’t think I’m going to get my wish
I completely agree
My favorite is His at Night, modeled on Scarlet Pimpernel. Very enjoyable.
I ADORE that book. It is SO smart. That’s a case where the heroine is iffy at first. Just so great.
I can’t remember if twas your review or Caz’s that got me to read it, shout out to you ladies
I found it to be enjoyable as well but a tad difficult to get through. I would have loved to have seen more of the romance between Penny and Elissande. Freddie getting his HEA was lovely
Leo is one of my favourite HR heroes and I’m so jealous that you’re discovering the joy of NQAH for the first time. I may be wrong but I think, NQAH and Ravishing The Heiress are the most complained about HRs written by Sherry because of how flawed the heroes are
Yep, I think I that’s maybe one of the reasons why she stopped writing Historical romance as well. And probably many other HR romance authors now I think about it, some readers seem to want perfect people but that’s not reality we are flawed in real life. Lisa kleypas is rewriting some of her ‘problematic’ book’s. Even though I’m not a fan of Lks writing the Idea spooked me a bit so now I buy most of my books I really like physically instead of digitally.
I loathe the changes Kleypas is making to her books. One of my favorite scenes in her work was the start of Secrets of a Summer Night (a weaker work, for sure) in which, at a panorama, the hero steals a kiss. Now, it’s gone. The lovely, sexy first sex scene in It Happened One Autumn, perhaps my fave of hers, has been rewritten because the heroine was somewhat drunk when it happened. The latter is particularly egregious because, in the book, Lillian specifically states that she knew just what Marcus was asking to do.
I feel as if it is fear based and that is equally upsetting. I’d like to see, on both sides of the aisle, people standing up to mob rule.
I fervently hope LK does not rewrite Devil in Winter. It is politically incorrect in several places but that’s what makes it such a fantastic romance.
Yep.
I still remember when LK caved to the bullies over … um… was it Hello Stranger? over a whole HALF PAGE, and then rewrote it.
A big downside of ebooks is that the text and covers can be changed without warning. I’m seeing complaints, frequently, as authors are updating their older, shirtless-man covers with silly cartoons that look like kids’ books, that readers don’t want them, but there’s nothing they can do to prevent them being updated, short of never, ever syncing their e-reader ever again. Retaining older versions should be an option, but then I suppose the argument is that the old version isn’t what the creator wants “out there” now, but there has to come a point where a creative work has to be regarded as finished and the creator just stops fiddling with it! Especially as the revisions are rarely for any actual creative reasons, but are in response to fear of backlash or fear of their books being banned because they look too sexy!
Well, we don’t own our ebooks and the publishers have the right to take them back and/or change them at anytime. Which is absurd.
It is. And many readers don’t seem to know that’s the case. I really don’t like that authors feel they need to do this, but there seems to be a big bunch of readers out there who just don’t get that the past was different to the present.
Calibre and an external hard drive can take care of some or all of this ownership problem (remove DRMs). Epubor for audiobooks. Non-DRM copies of ALL my audiobooks now live in an external hard drive, and I’m moving on to my ebooks next. (Thank you husband!) I bought them with real money, and they’re mine.
Just a note to anyone who wants to try this. The publishers claim that converting the books is illegal so keep it on the down low. Also, the current version of Calibre won’t convert Amazon epubs. You can find ways to still do it on the internet but it isn’t easy.
Of course it’s frowned upon, but we also have major companies publishing software to do it and have been for over a decade, so it’s one of the worst kept secrets out there. And, yes, it’s technically illegal, but so is using VPNs to get around geo-restrictions in visual media which millions of people do daily. It don’t make financial sense for Amazon to go after someone backing up their ebooks unless that person is trying to make money re-selling them. That’s why the DRM is there in the first place.
I decided to download and convert my audible library was that too many people in author groups I follow have had books disappear from their libraries.
Epubor Ultimate has a workaround for Amazon ebooks, but you’re right, it’s tricky. My main concern was my audiobooks, which cost significantly more than my ebooks. Also, there are a lot of ebooks I know I’ll never read again. In fact I recently went through my Kindle Library (starting at the easliest books I bought on Kindle, and started deleting some old books permanently.
Another downside of ebooks is you can’t donate or resell them like paper books.
I think the restrictions on ebooks are unethical so I’m comfortable with people converting!
I just wanted readers to know there is a risk.
They are both my favourite books by Sherry Thomas . Not sure what that says about me
It says you have good taste 🙂
Hear! Hear!
Private Arrangements, Not Quite A Husband and Ravishing The Heiress all tie for my favourite Sherry Thomas HR. I’ve re-read them all a couple of times and I still get excited whenever I decide to give either of them another go
I still haven’t read private arrangements. It’s in the vault for a very bad week that needs saving one day
It is just wonderful. I like the lead romance more than almost any of her others.
It’ll definitely have you engrossed so it’s a good choice to forget your troubles with
None* spelling mistake.
Not at all surprised about the female rage. I expect that will be around for a few years. Romantasy doesnt’ surprise me, either. I’m getting pretty bored of contemporary romances that don’t have something else going for them. They either have to have a dynamic/original plot and well drawn characters, or my romances need to be mixed with romance + _______: fantasy, mystery, suspense, sci-fi, steam punk, urban fantasy, etc. Since fantasy by itself is a very popular genre, it makes sense to combine it with romance for (hopefully) a good escapist read.
Dark Academia isn’t my cup of tea. And contemporary romances, like I said, are getting so boring it’s painful. More books than normal the past 6 months have been DNFs for me, and a lot of them were contemporaries. And I’ve been trying, but I can’t seem to find decent cosy mysteries even though there lying thick on the ground these days.
Not sure what my 2025 reading will look like.
I’m getting pretty bored of contemporaries too. I was telling myself it was the low conflict. I too need something more with my romance. Even a contemporary with a deep dive into a particular job, or much more well realised psychological commentary like Mhairi MacFarlane does, or god forbid some well written women’s fiction works better for me than a flat contemporary with no particular detail and a rehashing of the same old tropes.
I agree with you both – contemporary romance was never my thing anyway, but these days I pass on way more than I pick up because they’re all so same-y – even in m/m which is almost all I read these days. I have a very short list of authors whose contemporaries I will read without question – Jay Hogan, Fearne Hill, Briar Prescott, Sally Malcolm & Joanna Chambers, Rachel Reid, Ari Baran and Annabeth Albert; even though she’s gone the no-angst route, her character work is SO good that I can deal with the lack of conflict. Nicky James is mostly writing romantic suspense now, but her CR is always worth a look and if Gregory Ashe ever writes another one, I’ll definitely pick it up.
There’s a move, in some of the traditionally published m/m I’ve read over the last couple of years, towards a queer version of WF with the story more focused on the journey of its protagonist where the romance is secondary. Some of those have worked better for me than others. But I’m also finding my romance fix in the “romance and” books – mystery, suspense, fantasy, urban fantasy – because so much ‘basic’ CR is so dull and predictable.
Can you give an example ot two of the “queer version of WF?” That sounds interesting.
They’re stories where the lead’s personal growth is the focus and the romance takes a bit of a back seat, rather like the hybrid of CR and WF that’s emerged in m/f over the last few years.
I liked Nicolas DiDomizo’s Nearly Wed but just DNF’d an ARC of I Think They Love You by Julian Winters. Most of Timothy Janovsky’s books skew more into that category as well.
Thanks! I read Nearlywed and Janovsky’s The Fake Dating Game. I think you liked both books a tad more than I did. I think I’ve read other books that have the journey the main focus and enjoyed them. I’m fine with the romance takes a back seat as long as it has enough development to be interesting and if the story/journey is worth reading.
I agree on that – the situation and characters in NearlyWed were really well done, whereas those in the book I just DNF’ed were not. But if you look around at recent and upcoming releases in m/m, it seems that most of the romance is still coming from self-published authors where the trad.pubs are mostly* going for the “journey of discovery where the protag happens to be queer” books.
*Carina publishes Rachel Reid, Ari Baran and Allie Therin who are writing contemporaries and, in Therin’s case, historical paranormals – but they’re rare exceptions, as are Alexis Hall and KJ Charles, both of whom became popular over a number of years being self or indie published before being picked up by big name publishers. Last year’s Look Up Handsome (One More Chapter/Harper Collins) is another example of a “journey” book; the year before’s Stars in Your Eyes (Forever) is another. From reading Lisa’s reviews of Best Men and The Bump by Sydney Karger (Berkley) I’d guess they fall into that category as well.
I’d be interested to know if any one else who reads m/m regularly has noticed this – or is it just me?!
I think the low-conflict phenomena is kind of aiding this. I yearn for more; more depth, more life.
Just commented on this in your review, Lisa, of Thank You For Listening by Julia Whelan. You suggested the book might have been better without the subplots regarding the main protagonist’s grandmother, father, career grief, etc. But I welcome romances that have more going on than only the MCs infatuation with each other.
And to be precise, I’m not talking about a lot of what is really popular. I’m not a fan of writing like Colleen Hoover’s which is so all over the map that (for me) it isn’t anything; or Ana Huang’s which (for me) is one-note, repeated ad nauseum.
Colleen Hoover’s problem is her characters don’t act like real people, IMO.
Now see, I have no idea how I’d feel about that book years later.
Josh Lanyon is writing almost nothing but m/m cozy mysteries these days. They aren’t really my cup of tea as a genre but I’ll read anything Lanyon writes.
Cosy mysteries aren’t my thing either but Greg Ashe’s current Last Picks series is worth a look.
I’ve read Lanyon’s Secrets and Scabble series and enjoyed them. I’d definitely read more like that if you have any other suggestions. I’ve tried Gregory Ashe’s series and while it’s well-written, his style doesn’t fit me. I admit I don’t usually do lots of angst or stressful drama, but I did make it through all of Lanyon’s Adrien English series (it was tough!) and am very glad I did.
I wish there was a way to sort food romantasy from bad… On paper a blend of romance and fantasy should be just up my alley. But I like good writing and characterisation and original plots. I know there is some good stuff out there but you really can’t trust just any recommendation.
That’s what we’re here for!!!
I don’t particularly like the romantasy label or search out books with that label, but two books I’ve read and enjoyed recently probably fit it:
The Spellshop by Sarah Beth Durst
The Ornithologist’s Field Guide to Love by India Holton
They are very different, but both are very good.
I don’t like the romantasy label, either, mainly because it sound trite, plus it’s such a huge and widely varying genre. When I hear romantasy I always think of it as contemporary romance in Ren Fire drag- light and cutesy- it puts the emphasis squarely on the romance with the fantasy being an afterthought. It doesn’t feel like a good label for books like Ithose by lona Andrews, Charlie Adhara’s Big Bad Wolf series, or any of Allie Therin’s books I’ve read.
Romantasy doesn’t seem to encompass urban fantasy though – or does it? I’d call Andrews, Adhara and Therin urban fantasy (or paranormal). I got the impression that romantasy is kind of sexed up YA fantasy – heroines who Are Not Like Other Girls, love triangles, magic, dragons, etc.
Well, that makes sense and is pretty much how I feel when I hear the label. I guess I don’t really know how people define it, only what impression the term has made on me. Like I said, contemporary romance in Ren Faire drag. I think it’s confusing because romantic fantasy is a huge genre. And the line is pretty blurry with paranormal and urban fantasy, which are both still “fantasy” genres. It’s why this vague term feels so unhelpful.
It’s bigger tent than that but, yes, it is usually YA/NA. Some of it is great, however. Like every other genre, it has fabulous entries and crap ones.
I’d exclude urban fantasy because romantasies are almost always set in a world of their own making as opposed to urban fantasy which melds fantasy with our world.
I’d agree. I think of romantasy as having high fantasy elements, like being set in a world of long dresses, kings, etc.
It rarely feels set in modern times. Dark Academia is almost always set in modern-ish times and shares a lot of plot lines I see in romantasy.
Urban fantasy is a pretty distinct genre. Unless a deliberate mash up of a romance genre (which, let’s face it, everyone is actively trying to make work) urban fantasy generally doesn’t contain an HEA romance in each book. I’ve always thought urban fantasy : paranormal romance what women’s fiction : contemporary romance. There might be sex and relationships in urban fantasy but not an HEA type relationship – or at least, not until you get to the 3rd, 6th, 9th book in a series.
Urban fantasy: Charlaine Harris’ Sookie Stackhouse, Kim Harrison’s Rachel Morgan, Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files, Ben Aaronovitch’s Rivers of London
Paranormal Romance: Patricia Briggs, Kelley Armstrong, Ilona Andrews . . .
In my mind, there is essentially no difference between paranormal romance and romantasy, unless romantasy is a specific YA/NA subset of PR?
I see it differently. Romantasy = fantasy romance, so spells, magic, dragons, fae etc. Paranormal and urban fantasy are closer to each other, as PNR usually has vampires, werewolves, shifters and supernatural creatures, often in a world that resembles our own (which is where the UF comes in.)
Andrews, Briggs etc. = Urban Fantasy with some PNR elements
Hailey Turner’s Soulbound series is UF with some PNR elements (shifters etc.)
But Nazri Noor’s Arcane Hearts/Wild Hearts are Fantasy – fae, magical creatures, spells, magic and magical instruments.
But I think – based on reviews here and elsewhere – Romantasy is definitely fantasy based rather than paranormal or urban fantasy based, and has seemed to grow out of YA fantasy.
That’s the way I categorise them anyway.
Makes sense. For me, paranormal is a subset of fantasy, set in a modern world. Vampires and shifters and all of that is still “magic”. Something we can’t explain or predict with science, and don’t expect to figure out how to do or make happen in real life.
So, for me, a romance with “magic” of any type, set in a modern world is paranormal romance; and fantasy romance is set in an “old” world e.g. castles and villages and forest creatures and wizards who wear robes, for example.
Which is why “romantasy” seems to me to be just the latest marketing term – but not anything actually new or different. Having not really read any of it (romantasy), I’m happy to think of it in terms of YA/NA characters . . .
I would agree with your definitions, Caz. Romantasy has high fantasy elements, but paranormals do not. For people who utilize genre definitions, they are pretty distinctly different. I know some people who like romantasy who wouldn’t touch paranormals and vice-versa.
I guess we all have differing definitions for genres and sub-genres. Like Caz, I consider anything with werewolves, vampires, etc set in an urban setting, whether modern or historical, to be urban fantasy as opposed to high fantasy. Steampunk can often be combined with UF as well. Many, actually most, urban fantasies I’ve read are also romances, like Charlie Adhara’s Big Bad Wolf series or Jenienne Frost’s Cat and Bones series. With these series the romance started in the first book and builds. Vampire UF romances were huge about 15 years ago, and I read lots of those series,
For me, while paranormals can have some UF crossover, they can be set in just about any time period or georgaphy as long as the emphasis is on magic and supernatural instead of beings like werewolves, etc. Paranormal books can also be romances. For me they include books like Allie Therin’s Magic in Manhattan and Roaring 20’s Magic, as well as so many of Jane Ann Krentz’s books.
It looks like I’ll primarily continue to be reading new-to-me backlist romances. The only upcoming release on my TBR is Joanna Lowell’s A Rare Find. And she’s signed to Berkley, which evidently is eager to do away with their remaining historical romance, according to other authors signed with them, so I’m not sure if this will be her last release from that publisher.
I’ll be very curious to see what the demise of BookTok does to romance publishing. It’s so pushed Romantasy, Dark Romance, and Contemporary romance. I keep hoping something will happen that will revitalize traditional historical romance!
It’s not just Berkley – I’ve heard something similar about Avon and the other traditional publishers, too.
Avon killed its historical romance except for some of the very biggest names in the industry and, of course, the occasional “modern” heroine centric historical romance.
!! This is how I found out the new Joanna Lowell’s coming out!
I read a number of these categories regularly but stay picky when it comes to what I love. Anything can be good in the right hands, but when publishers hit the same themes over and over again, it gets dull.
I think I’ll just be reading whatever I’m in the mood for. Historical mystery/romance/fiction; paranormal romance; and the countless books I’ve bought on my kindle. It’ll probably change frequently. I’m not too worried about the trends because I have so many options already, I don’t really need new books.
and I should add I have a ton of Lisa Kleypas, Meredith Duran, Courtney Milan, Julie Anne Long, Loretta Chase etc. that I’ve never read so I’ve gone enough HR to last a while even if they are being published less
You have some good reading ahead of you – those authors are amongst the greatest HR authors of all time!
I think e-readers have taken the edge off the angst I would typically feel when seeing a list like this. Just a few decades ago, if I wanted to read an old book (published five/six years or beyond in the past) I would have my work cut out for me, scouring bookstores and websites for it. Some old novels went for hundreds. Now, with very rare exceptions, I just click and download. I have so many unread books on my kindle that if they stop publishing any books tomorrow, I would be fine for at least a few years.
I feel the same! I was resistant to the concept of e-books initially but now I am a convert. I haven’t gone to a used bookstore in a long time. I have also read a lot of wonderful books from authors who self-publish, which would not be possible without e-books. I keep thinking that I will catch up on my enormous e-book TBR after I retire in a few years from now by reading a book every day. However, my TBR is so huge at this point that this will take me several years and since I will continue to add books to the pile, I’m not sure I will ever catch up!
That’s me exactly!
Yes. A sum of the estimated reading time of my spreadsheet of the higher-priority subset of my ebooks works out to 5.5 years if I could read 12 hours a day 365 days a year (which is well above my actual available reading time).
Some trends I see include mashups between genres (romcom + fantasy, cozy + paranormal, STEM + historical, etc.) I used to love romance anthologies but now I see Kindle Singles (The Fall Risk, Abby Jimenez, March 1), or books in audio only (Mis-directed by Lucy Parker, Feb 4). I have read a few Dramione fanfiction inspired romances and really liked one of them, the others were too dark for me. The hardest thing about Romantasy for me are series with cliffhangers and I have to wait a year for the next book. (Onyx Storm by Rebecca Yarros, Jan 21, 3rd book in the Fourth Wing series and it’s 754 pages long). Even Nora Roberts has her Lost Bride trilogy, with cliff hangers (3rd book comes out in Nov). I also see some popular self pub authors reissue books with big publishers.
I agree that publishers are pushing/moving towards mashups, which will appeal to multiple audiences. Certainly, a lot of contemporary romance is a hybrid between romance and women’s fiction.
I tend not to read series till they are done. I’ve been burned too often by cliffhangers, and I honestly don’t want to wait a year or more, keeping details in my mind as to what happened to get an ending.
I wonder if this cliffhanger issue is a more a problem in fantasy or paranormal books. I read a lot of contemporary romances and although some will have a plot element running through the series, it is not usually a major plot and I haven’t had to go back and read the previous books. I have often encountered cliffhangers in the YA fantasy series I have read and like you, sometimes I wait for the whole series to be complete before starting. I am just too old and read too many books to remember a plot line from a year ago!
I’ve definitely come across more cliffhangers in “romance and” books – fantasy, paranormal, suspense etc. where there are more likely series with overarching plotlines. I don’t have too much of a problem with it, although as a reviewer who reviews a lot of books when they’re first published, it can be frustrating! (I’m lookling at YOU, Twisted Shadows!)
I’ve found it depends more on whether the author is planning a series or standalone. And I’m just not down with series anymore.
This is how I feel about TV shows, movies, and books. (I am refusing to see Wicked Part One because there shouldn’t be a Part One.)
YES!! My daughters are HUGE fans of the musical and have both seen the movie and loved it. But how can the film be double the length of the stage version it’s based on? The blatant money-grabbing is what has really got my goat.
We have a friend of ours visiting right now who lives in the City and whose husband works in the arts. They see more shows than anyone I know. They hated they movie-they both fell asleep during it. He–my friend–felt that it was too long, poorly edited and more spectacle than story. He did think Erivo and Bailey were great.
I’m the same. Didn’t see/haven’t seen Dune for the same reason.
We finally just watched both Dunes. Waaaay too long–more films that needed editing IMO!
If I know there’s a cliffhanger I won’t read the book. I’ll wait until the next one is out if it’s a series I’m really interested in. If not, I just skip them.
I’m not really interested in many of the trends you describe. So I guess it will be another year of reading things published in the past.
What am I looking forward to?
Genre – I hope that after romantasy and rom-coms, the next trend in Romance novels is going to be suspense, thrillers, that kind of book. Two of the trends you mention point in that direction.
Style – I would love to see the end of the dual first person narrative, I’m sick of it, it makes all the books sound the same, all the characters are indistinguishable. It doesn’t matter the name on the cover, it’s as if I’ve been reading the same book once and again for nearly ten years.
Please, please, give me third person narrative with a little bit of mystery. The first persona narrative tends to be verbose and boring, I don’t want to see on the page every minutiae the character thinks or feels.
I would love to see the end of the dual first person narrative…
Or if not the end, at least it being used so frequently. But I see so many reviews obviously written by readers in their twenties and thirties who LOVE it and hate third person with a passion, so it’s yet another instance of what’s been said elsewhere about publishers chasing the younger audience. My youngest (22 yo) daughter prefer first – she says she feels more connected to the main character that way and more involved, while my elder (25) says she used to feel like that, but now generally prefers 3rd.
Unless in the hands of a really skilled author, first person is not my narrative style of choice, for all the reasons you list, but it’s becoming harder and harder to avoid it. I also dislike the fact that 1st person dual narrative has lead to so many romance audiobooks being narrated by two performers rather than one; I’d much rather listen to one highly talented narrator than, as often happens, one good and one not so good.
First person narration combined with everyone is, at heart, a really good person makes for flat writing. The best first person narratives are by characters you can’t trust as narrators–think Amy in Gone Girl or the judge in And Then There Were None. I am bored to tears by first person narrators, so ubiquitous in contemporary romance who say things like (and this is from a book I just DNF’d):
(the hero) I don’t mean this to sound all judgmental. I certainly have my vices. But I don’t think cell phones were good for them. They’re probably not good for anyone . I have this theory that you should only use cell phones as proxies for things that existed before cell phones—so, like, use it as an actual phone, use it as a map, read a book on it. But don’t use it for things that can only be done with a cell phone, you know? By which I mean, don’t do social media. It messes with your brain. Changes your personality, and not in a good way.
Ugh. So pat myself on the back-y. I am not here for it.
What a self-righteous prick. That’s not characterisation, that’s author insertion.
This entire book, by an author I used to love, is one long virtue signal after another, all told in an upbeat, friendly first person scold. (It’s dual first person.)
At one point, the female lead dismisses an entire generation of men as being ruined by Andrew Tate. Really? An entire generation, a time period usually defined as 20 to 30 years? The book read more as an instruction manual for how to be a perfect modern person than a love story between two real and interesting people.
I’ve been seeing that a lot in contemporary romance and romantasy. There is an endless insertion of virtue signaling, and the sad thing is, I don’t think it is author-motivated. So many people today virtue signal by who they support/hang out with/tolerate as opposed to what they actually do that an author is practically obligated to fly the credentials of whatever group they stand with.
And yet… there are tons of writers (just check out the best seller list at Amazon for romance e-books) that are not doing that. Art loses its power–and this is just my opinion–when its function is to signal to one’s friends that you share their values.
I am not saying that I think authors should do this, just that I’ve seen it happening a lot, specifically in contemporary romance and romantasy, as well as YA. I would agree that a good book examines all sides of the story, and I find that a lot in the mystery market, which might be why I prefer it right now.. For example, in Hoag’s Bad Liar we got to see the whole tragedy of what happened. It wasn’t a clear case of these five things are bad, these five things are good but a case of how we all prioritize different things and someone with a good value (love of family) can let it lead them to bad places.
I didn’t think you were–and I too am finding more mysteries I love these days. In fact, I am reading Bad Liar on your rec!
Agree about dual narrators. I’ve decided to do several books in print this past year because one of the narrator pair is someone I know I don’t enjoy. And like you said, it’s doubly frustrating when you know the other narrator has the chops to handle it on their own. Even with two good narrators they can’t make their narration of the the characters sound the same. In one book lately the differences between how one narrator voiced a character and how the other did was so different I had trouble reconciling them as the same person in my head. Even in m/f romance I’d much rather have one good narrator, like Kate Reading.
I’ve always prefered 3rd person POV and used to actively avoid books with 1st person POV. Now if I did that I’d not have much to read!
That’s why I lately tend to read romance novels published before 2015. With very few exceptions, they ‘re all third person narrative, even if some of them have a deep point of view.
Small town romance and cozy mysteries are my personal catnip but besides that, eh. I am glad to see a decline of the alpha male! Less women needing saving and more women saving themselves, even in romance!
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/jan/24/romantasy-fans-new-rebecca-yarros-novel-book-empyrean-onyx-storm
On romance.io every week there are lists of published books and those to come. There are some trends not mentioned:
Cozy fantasy: There is magic, impressive worlds and even magical schools but nothing very deadly or terrible, it is like a Hallmark movie made into a book with fantasy and better character development.
More Dark romance: A questioned niche but with many fans and it is growing where heroes are increasingly more amoral and brutal to some who are more Batman style whose hobby is killing bad guys.
Reverse harem: Quite a few are being published independently, a girl, many boys who establish romantic relationships with her and most of these books have group sex scenes. Reverse harem without sex are several Japanese otome games.
Monster romance: Gargoyles, minotaurs, beastmen who look like beasts…it seems to be going well for the authors who write this.