Romance originally did not refer, necessarily, to love matches. It often included love matches, though not always positive ones. "Romance" in the medieval era referred to prose with heroic deeds. The term was often used to categorize what moderns might call "action novels," though these would be action novels with great deeds and dealings that revolve around honor and dishonor.
At the beginning of the Modern Era, the Romantic movement included authors such as the Brontes (not Austen who is grounded in the Classical movement), the Romantic poets, and the Gothic subgenre. Altogether, the movement emphasized feelings and the fantastical. It bridged several movements, so Frankenstein, for instance, pulls directly from the Romantic movement yet also anchors itself in Realism. Now, it is often also associated with science-fiction."Fantasy" eventually got drawn into the term. Mysteries also often fall under the general romance standard: Conan Doyle's original Sherlock masterpieces are far more suffused with ambiance and the "lone hero" (with sidekick) exploring the dark and unknown and odd than those short stories are often credited.
The Pre-Raphaelite steampunk-like combination of history, futuristic speculations, and personal emotional observation entails that the genres connected to Romance rely, to a degree, on allusion, the ability of the authors to deploy tropes and archetypes with ease. C.S. Lewis and Tolkien come to mind, of course. They so thoroughly understood Northern Mythology, they created unself-conscious works full of allusions that they utilized without pause.
The cowboy is, of course, a romantic |
archetype, in the older sense. |
Highbrow writers do the same, of course, but they are far more fastidious. (These are writers who insist on calling fantasy, "magical realism.") The deployment of allusions is often more about the writers than the characters or plot. They are calling attention to the archetypes rather than using them. (Psych, unfortunately, did the same in its later seasons.)
When fairy tale/mythological archetypes and tropes are used--and used for the love of those archetypes and tropes--the result can be entrancing.
"R" contains a number of bona fide romantic authors/editors: Rusch, Rowling, Roddenberry (Original Trek is awash with tropes and archetypes drawn from classic tales), Riordan, Raskin (it is hard to characterize Raskin but the works are definitely fantastical, however grounded in realism).
There's more. For this post, I decided to showcase Emily Rodda of the Rowan series. I was immediately impressed in Book One with how easily Rodda presents the protagonist, the village, and the problem.I was further impressed by the honesty of the narration. Rowan is a shy, easily frightened youngster who, readers quickly realize, is capable of clearly and objectively assessing a situation. He does not recognize he has this strength, and he has no plans on joining the expedition to the top of the Mountain.
Once he joins, he keeps going. Near the end of the novel, when the group is reduced from seven to four, Rowan realizes that not only he but at least one of his other companions is more relaxed now that the group is smaller. The other characters weren't evil or even bad--in fact, the author treats them with great compassion. But they weren't compatible with the group that remains.
And, of course, I could appreciate the use of tropes and archetypes, such as the puzzles or tasks. Rodda doesn't simply throw them into the story--ah, here's another one. Although Rowan is an archetypal undeclared hero who undergoes a hero's journey, including an exciting return home, he is part of a group of quite distinct companions. And though he solves the quest alone, he is not alone at the end.
I highly recommend the series.
No comments:
Post a Comment