I read a contemporary romance by a new author this week,
which didn’t really work for me, because it used a time-worn convention that
has started to get on my nerves. I’ll
call it hate at first sight. I won’t
name the book, or even write a review, because I would hate to be negative about a
newly-published author, but I will name and shame the hackneyed convention.
The hero and heroine meet for the first time and are clearly
attracted to each other – and why not, they are perfect for each other – but
the heroine senses some undefined hostility in the hero and instantly mirrors this
back to him. She then spends the next
few chapters coming into conflict with him, and asking herself (too many times)
what it is about him that rubs her up the wrong way. She doesn’t find an answer. Needless to say, their paths cross fairly
often, and sometimes they seem to be on the edge of making a friendly
breakthrough – which is quite understandable, since they are, as I said,
clearly made for each other and destined to be together at the end, because
this is, after all a romance, and we all know how they work. Until then, however, misunderstandings
continue to keep relations between them sizzling and hostile, and numerous golden
opportunities for them to get to know each other and understand what makes each
other tick are lost.
Towards the end of the novel, our hero and heroine naturally
discover the reason for the silly misunderstanding and rush off into the sunset
(or bedroom) for their happily ever after.
What I object to about this is since they have denied
themselves every opportunity to get to know each other, the attraction between
them has never been more than purely physical.
That isn’t love, surely, and nor is it particularly romantic.
Not to my mind, anyway. But perhaps I'm just too old-fashioned.
