So many good books and authors on that list. I was happy to see old favorites Tessa Dare and Grace Burrowes, the incomparable Nora, as well as Julia Quinn, Susanna Kearsley and Mary Stewart. I was also pleased to find some paranormal romance - I adore Ilona Andrews, and Meljean Brook is pretty terrific, too. Now if there was just some way to make some of the covers and titles a bit less ... silly? (Lord of Scoundrels, Warrior's Woman, and Blaze, I'm looking at you!)

Thanks for the list!

I've read all of Mary Stewart, Susannah Kearsley, M. M. Kaye, Charlotte Bronte, Jane Austen, and Diana Gabaldon; and some of Victoria Holt and Gorgette Heyer; but what I want to know is what on earth have they done with Barbara Michaels? I loved her.

Bridgerton is lovely rubbish. It makes very little sense at all, and it dances on the edge of being soft core porn, occasionally tipping over that edge. The costumes are pure fantasy rather than history. But oh, the lead couple are incredibly beautiful! It truly is a joy to look upon them.

I can tell you EXACTLY when the first bodice ripper with bare chested hero was published because I was working in a bookstore when it came out. It was Kathleen Woodiwiss's novel The Flame and the Flower published in 1972. Other saucy historical romances had come before (think of Forever Amber), but this was the one that made everything happen. It was an instant hit. We simply could not keep it on the shelf. I myself did not care for it, finding the heroine petulant and annoying. Many of today's writers are much better. Some, alas, are not.

In any case, the romance genre has never been the same.

I share a cynical attitude toward romance novels with Vee. I just can't muster up any interest at all.

I worked as a teenager in a subscription library where we were encouraged to read books of all genres to recommend them to the customers. I read a few romance books and was furious that the authors reworked plots from Georgette Heyer! She threatened to sue Barbara Cartland, I think.

I was told that publishers sent their authors lists of plot suggestions, which explained why some novels were similar.

I have found books that I enjoy in just about every genre that I've tried.

Romance is not my favorite but there are romances on that list I liked a great deal. Just to name one, I've read The Far Pavilions several times, a sweepingly romantic book in the original 19th century meaning of romanticism. For another not on the list, Daphne du Maurier's Frenchman's Creek. Most romances that I really like are more than just love stories, but had a love story that was important to the plot. Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte are examples. (Jane Eyre is probably my favorite book ever.)

Now I don't think I've ever liked a bodice ripper all that much. I like more complexity than that, in both characterization and in plot. And I frequently prefer love stories with a bittersweet quality. Austen's Persuasion has this quality, as do both Far Pavilions and Frenchman's Creek. This is something publishers are discouraging in current romance novels. They think we only want happy endings.

I am willing to believe that there do exist bodice rippers I would like, if I read enough of them to find the gems. Probably not going to happen because I'm not willing to wade through that many.

The only genre of which I've never liked any I've read (and I haven't read many) is true crime. Oh, and maybe police procedurals. The first is too scary and the second too grim for my tastes.

For me, romance novels are absolutely escapism. When I was in my 30s with small children that was literally the only genre I read. My reading life has expanded tremendously since then, but I still enjoy the romance category. I have a handful of trusted romance authors (contemporary, urban fantasy, and Regency settings) whose books I love, and I do tend to steer clear of ripping bodices and leather-trousered barbarian warriors (best description ever!), but I'll confess to a weakness for the occasional vampire leading man.

I had read the Bridgerton books a number of years ago before the TV series was made and remember liking them enough to read them all. The details are long gone from my memory, and I don't think I've read anything by Julia Quinn since, but I did really enjoy the TV production. It's been an awful year, I'll take all the escapism I can get.

I have to agree. Leather-trousered barbarian warriors, just fabulous! Almost makes me want to read the book. The person who wrote that blurb is clearly a genius.

I read the first of the Bridgerton books when the series was about to be released. I have to tell you, it pales next to the series. I'm probably not going to continue. Though I did cheat to find out who Lady Tell-All was. And I'm not going to tell all here.

I think of myself as not being a romance reader. And it is true that I never sit down with a stack of Harlequin romances or bodice rippers to while away the time. But looking over that list and some reflective thought made me realize that I have read more romances than I realized, and no doubt will continue to do so in the future.

I blame Barbara Cartland for my daughter's marriage at age 19. I've never been a fan of that type of book, although my sister, her daughter, and a sister-in-law used to trade grocery bags of them back and forth. Sis finally got tired of them, preferring some light mystery in the story line, but she always wants a happily ever after ending.

I read some of Barbara Cartland's books in my teen years. In my measured, dispassionate opinion Cartland was a truly dreadful writer. I consider many of her books to have been feeble plaigiarizations of other books. Even worse, her heroines were always so darned helpless!

I have often thought that Princess Diana's unfortunate marriage was inspired by her step-grandmother's books.

https://theattic.jezebel.com/romancing-the-throne-1845654818

Rosefolly, I liked earlier Cartland stories which I read in installments in magazines, I think. They were about modern young women who aspired to a better and more interesting life through work after some problem or other! I can't remember the details but they were engaging and uplifting. I suppose they echoed her struggles as a young woman in some way.

The late 40s and early 50s post-war novels had this theme in stories written by a number of authors. They went against the push for women to go back to the domestic role after the war finished.

I've never read anything by Barbara Cartland but have watched various TV interview shows in which she took part. I always felt she was included to add 'amusement value' in rather an unkind way and remember one in which a modern 'Agony Aunt' was being quite rude and aggressive towards her. Miss Cartland keep her cool throughout and never once replied to the snide remarks with anything less than good manners!

Good for her! I read that she was very active as a Town Councillor and organised her friends into visiting lonely women. Sadly she was unseated in an election and the group disbanded. The Councillor who took her place wasn't able to get such a group together. I would like to think that perhaps some of the friends still kept in touch with the lonely souls.

Vee, I would agree. I never saw the TV shows, but when I read about her it seems that she is portrayed as a caricature rather than a real person. I still don't like her books, but that was unacceptable. I'm glad to hear she kept her cool.

One of the best -- most entertaining, at least -- classes I took in Continuing Education was a Women's Studies course called "Reading the Romance", the title lifted from one of the set texts by Janice A. Radway. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature. This was in the late 1980s and my children were small so I was ripe, at the time, for escapism as well as some intellectual stimulation. That course was just the ticket I needed.

I thought Radway was a bit too earnest in trying to understand women's motivations for reading romances when feminists (third wave?), men, academics, and anyone with intellectual pretensions tended to disparage romanticism. They still do, as far as I know. My classmates and I thought the so-called "blighting of women's reading tastes" was being blown all out of proportion, so we drew up our own lists of our favorite romances to discuss. They were all over the map! I remember that the generational aspects were the most interesting -- for example, younger readers appreciated explicit language and graphic images while older readers didn't need "diagrams drawn" and preferred descriptions that left a lot to the imagination. I was in my late thirties so I could easily straddle the fence.

Anyway, some of the romances that I remember my class fondly discussing and defending:

Gone with the Wind -- of course!

All This, and Heaven Too by Rachel Field (yes, the same Rachel Field, 1894-1942, who wrote the beloved Newbury Medal Winner Hitty Her First Hundred Years) I loved this story of a governess who loved the children who were her charges and how she got mixed up in her employers' disastrous marriage. I always liked Jane Eyre, but All This, and Heaven Too intrigued me more because it was a novel based on true events in France in the 1840s. The governess eventually went to America where she became author Field's great aunt, by marriage.

Katherine by Anya Seton (another favorite of mine) I will always have a soft spot for John of Gaunt. although his historical reputation is not good. But, oh! What he did for Katherine Swynford when he found her in her husband's filthy, rundown castle where she gave birth to her and Sir Hugh's son.

Rosefolly, I'm glad you mentioned Frenchman's Creek. I didn't see any of DduM's other books on the list, but it only has 100 titles. There could easily be lists with thousands of romance titles.

My classmates talked me into reading some of the bodice rippers, which didn't impress me mightily. One I do recall liking was Jude Devereaux's A Knight in Shining Armor, but I really don't remember why. It had something to do with time traveling, a subgenre that appeals sometimes to me.

Edited to add bolding to book titles which often doesn't work for me when first submitted. Seems to work for other posters, though.

I suppose I think of the romance books as bodice rippers, which I don't enjoy. I love all the books Frieda mentions plus a lot more like them. Aren't Rebecca and Gone with the Wind and Katherine more than just romance? I've learned a lot of history (prettied up, I concur) by reading fiction.

Frieda, have you read any of Jeri Westerson's books? The main character starts out as a supporter of John of Gaunt for king. They are fanciful mysteries concerning his fall from grace and subsequent poverty and work as a "finder" of things, mostly holy relics, in King Richard's London.

Carolyn, when I think of romances I automatically remember, first, the ones in the historical subgenre and, second, those in romantic suspense or those with elements of mystery. Certainly, in my opinion, Rebecca and GwtW and Katherine are more than just romance -- they are multilayered and complex in the way Rosefolly described above. But the romance is the glue that binds all the other parts together, I think.

Sometimes I'm annoyed that the bodice ripper subgenre has coopted the term romance. It seems that some writers and readers have made romance synonymous with sex -- or lust, in the case of BRs. I'd say the BRs are erotica (though slightly softer) rather than romance. I suppose eroticism could be romantic, but I haven't run across any erotic novels that are essentially romantic foremost, and I probably won't because I don't seek out that sort of thing. Erotica is too repetitive and yawn-inducing for my taste.

I haven't read any of Jeri Westerson's books featuring John of Gaunt. I'll check 'em out to see if they suit me. Thanks!

Does anyone have an opinion about which of Mary Stewart's books is the most romantic? The NPR list includes Nine Coaches Waiting, but while I think it's a good one -- in the Gothic vein -- I'm not sure it's the one that gave me the most romantic vibes.

I don't know which Mary Stewart is the most romantic, but I love the one that began "I met him in the street called Straight." She is the author I blame for my travel bug.

The Gabriel Hounds is the source of that opening line. I re-read all Mary Stewart's romantic suspense stories a few years ago, even tracking down hardcover copies for most of them. Our mother loved them, too. I think my sister Rouan would say that she prefers the Arthurian books. Perhaps she'll pop in and comment. I liked the Arthur books okay, but the suspense novels are my favorites. Her heroes are acceptable, but it is the strong, intelligent, sensible heroines I liked best. And, as Carolyn says, all that wonderful travel. I wonder if that might be part of the origin of my own travel bug, too.

I forget which one is my favorite. It would be either Thunder on the Right or Wildfire at Midnight. Must be the mountains. Both have mountains in them. I rather like high hills.

I can hardly wait to start traveling again. It will come.

Nine Coaches Waiting gets my vote. The love story has more depth for the heroine. Attraction, acceptance and then the feeling of betrayal before it all comes out right!

I had the second cataract op on Monday, after a Lockdown cancelled my public hospital op and forced me to go private again! I did not want to wait for months possibly with the procedure only half done!

I am not in a holiday mood. There is the danger of a sudden lockdown bringing the interstate border closures again or even a border cutting us off from areas of my State. It is too risky.

I really liked Mary Stewart's Madam, Will You Walk. I didn't mean I liked Gabriel Hounds the best of her books. I just loved that opening line. I think I will have to read them all again. I did re-read Airs Above the Ground before DD's and my trip to Vienna where we saw the Lipizzaner horses perform. I'm not much for animals, but that was a beautiful show.

I have lovely memories of seeing those horses too. I had a German friend write and book tickets for me as we were going to Austria on our European trip. When we went to collect them we were offered better seats and sat facing the show under the Royal box. Best view possible! We nearly missed the show as I misread the start time and went flying from our hotel when I realised my mistake and had to get my husband out of the bath pronto!

Ann, I can see it now--your husband running down the street trying to towel himself dry and catch up with you.

Our only problem was trying to find the subway station in the dark in order to get back to our hotel.

Carolyn, it wasn't that bad! He did scramble into some clothes. CURSE THE 24 HOUR TIMES!

Responding to Rosefolly’s remarks on Mary Stewart books a little late. I really like her Arthurian books; they are my favorite version of the Arthurian legends but I also like her other stories too. Each one has something special that I like from the Lippizaner stallions in Airs Above the Ground to the hidden statue in the cave in My Brother Michael. It’s hard to choose from among them.

Rouan, have you read Sword at Sunset by Rosemary Sutcliff? It presents Arthur as a war lord trying to save at least part of the country after the Romans leave. I liked it a lot, as well as the Stewart books.

Carolyn, no I haven’t read it. I’ll have to see if my library has it and give it a shot. Thanks for the recommendation.

I tried the romance novel with the leather-trousered barbarian warrior because, why not? Well, I found it absolutely unreadable. My apologies to any fans of this author, but I could't even get past the second chapter.

However I have been dipping into some of the others. Most do not appeal to me, but every so often I rather liked an author (beyond the tried-and-true writers I already loved). This has been an illuminating experiment. I'm ready to go back to my usual fare, but I'm glad I wandered this way.

If you can't try a new experience in the midst of a pandemic, when can you?