Robin Lee Hatcher article

Posted by Posted for Nora Roberts by LLB on April 15, 2002 at 09:56:54:

In Reply to: An article about Robin Lee Hatcher that may surprise you posted by LLB on April 11, 2002 at 13:25:16:

I found Robin's comments offensive and disturbing and disappointing on every level--as a reader, a writer, a woman, an RWA member. For a former president of RWA, and a writer who built her foundation in Romance to distill the genre
down to sexual fantansies, and to compare readers to addicts is appalling to me. To compare writing love scenes with giving a drink to an alcoholic is beyond insulting. Alcoholism is a disease. With the illiteracy rate in this country, every book picked up and read for pleasure should be a celebration.

On tour I often, still, have to deal with some media people who like to skewer the genre, or the (mostly) women who read it. I've just spend two
weeks standing for Romance--I'm not looking for a medal, even a pat on the back. I'm not saying anything I don't believe strongly. But I wasn't looking for a knife in the back either, from a fellow writer.

Romance isn't all about sex. It's all about relationships, and sex is a healthy part of a healthy, adult relationship. And we readers are not morons. We know the difference between fiction and reality. The books are our
entertainment, our relaxation, our pleasure, and we're entitled. We are hardly sheep, as can be witnessed pretty much daily on sites like this one. We don't agree on what we like, what we dislike, what we want, what we don't want in the books or the genre. But, for the most part, we agree we enjoy reading Romance.

It would have been smarter, and certainly more gracious, for Robin to have said she'd decided to persue another avenue of fiction because of her
personal beliefs and creative needs. Period. Why smear the genre to make whatever point she sought to make?

I have no doubt she'll regret the remarks, and kick herself for not being more careful in her answers and statements. Interviews are tough. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt on this one if she hadn't been so clear in her opinion, and so detailed.

Nora Roberts

Follow Ups:

• Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Rosalyn Alsobrook 17:48:09 04/18/02 (17)
  • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Pam 08:28:19 04/19/02 (3)
    • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Rosalyn Alsobrook 18:12:10 04/19/02 (2)
      • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Sunny 00:19:49 04/20/02 (0)
      • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Suse 18:57:21 04/19/02 (0)
  • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Sandi M 22:38:31 04/18/02 (6)
    • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Rosalyn Alsobrook 18:15:23 04/19/02 (5)
      • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article LLB 18:20:05 04/19/02 (4)
        • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Rosalyn 19:54:31 04/19/02 (3)
          • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article LLB 20:51:17 04/19/02 (2)
            • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Rosalyn 09:22:43 04/20/02 (1)
              • Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Misty 11:04:19 04/20/02 (0)
  • Are you calling me a liar? LLB 18:51:49 04/18/02 (5)
    • Re: Are you calling me a liar? Rosalyn Alsobrook 22:14:12 04/18/02 (4)
      • Re: Are you calling me a liar? An Author 12:06:55 04/19/02 (1)
        • Re: Are you calling me a liar? Rosalyn 19:58:07 04/19/02 (0)
      • Re: Are you calling me a liar? AK11 23:06:34 04/18/02 (1)
        • Re: Are you calling me a liar? Rosalyn 19:44:14 04/19/02 (0)
• Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Diana Coleman 19:58:36 04/15/02 (0)
• Re: Robin Lee Hatcher article Alexis Harrington 15:09:10 04/15/02 (7)
  • Sheep? Maureen Bothe 22:02:45 04/15/02 (6)
    • Re: Sheep? The mysterious LLB 09:18:54 04/16/02 (0)
    • Hello? Steph 22:18:09 04/15/02 (0)
    • Re: Sheep? Cara 22:08:35 04/15/02 (3)
      • Re: Sheep? The reason why my time here is occasional Jennifer 13:54:50 04/20/02 (2)
        • Re: Sheep? The reason why my time here is occasional Sunny 02:11:09 04/21/02 (1)
          • Re: Sheep? The reason why my time here is occasional Jennifer 18:31:21 04/21/02 (0)

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: I found Robin's comments offensive and disturbing and disappointing on every level--as a reader, a writer, a woman, an RWA member. For a former president of RWA, and a writer who built her foundation in Romance to distill the genre : down to sexual fantansies, and to compare readers to addicts is appalling to me. To compare writing love scenes with giving a drink to an alcoholic is beyond insulting. Alcoholism is a disease. With the illiteracy rate in this country, every book picked up and read for pleasure should be a celebration. : On tour I often, still, have to deal with some media people who like to skewer the genre, or the (mostly) women who read it. I've just spend two : weeks standing for Romance--I'm not looking for a medal, even a pat on the back. I'm not saying anything I don't believe strongly. But I wasn't looking for a knife in the back either, from a fellow writer. : Romance isn't all about sex. It's all about relationships, and sex is a healthy part of a healthy, adult relationship. And we readers are not morons. We know the difference between fiction and reality. The books are our : entertainment, our relaxation, our pleasure, and we're entitled. We are hardly sheep, as can be witnessed pretty much daily on sites like this one. We don't agree on what we like, what we dislike, what we want, what we don't want in the books or the genre. But, for the most part, we agree we enjoy reading Romance. : It would have been smarter, and certainly more gracious, for Robin to have said she'd decided to persue another avenue of fiction because of her : personal beliefs and creative needs. Period. Why smear the genre to make whatever point she sought to make? : I have no doubt she'll regret the remarks, and kick herself for not being more careful in her answers and statements. Interviews are tough. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt on this one if she hadn't been so clear in her opinion, and so detailed. : Nora Roberts