My thesis examines four popular romance novels from the 1970s to 2010s: The Flame and the Flower by Kathleen Woodiwiss, Temptation's Kiss by Sandra Brown, Dark Lover by J.R. Ward, and A Princess in Theory by Alyssa Cole. My thesis questions, "Are romance novels feminist?" Through interdisciplinary textual analysis--fat studies, disability studies, women's studies, and more were considered--my thesis argues that all five novels elucidate feminist themes. However, only one text, A Princess in Theory, succeeds as a feminist text. My thesis argues that popular romance novels have greatly improved since the 1970s, but more intentional work in diversifying the genre and the publishing process must be done for the genre to fully realize its feminist potential.
---
I don't want to single out Eccles unfairly, because this does seem to be a common opinion, but it's an incorrect one: "Since The Flame and the Flower is considered the first historical romance novel, ignoring Woodiwiss and her pioneering text was not an option" (4). Woodiwiss's novel is indeed an important text, and set off a the trend in US publishing for "bodice-rippers", but it's definitely not the first historical romance novel. Georgette Heyer, for example, had been writing historical romance novels for decades by then. Incidentally, when I went to check how Wikipedia refers to The Flame and the Flower, I found that it was stating that "It was also the first full-length romance novel to be published first in paperback rather than hardback." There may be differences of opinion regarding what should be considered the first "full-length" romance novel (for example, Pamela Regis' "exploration of the history of the romance novel in English begins with Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded (1740)" (63)). However, it should be clear from the photographs of Rebecca Romney's selection of romance novels that there are many early first edition hardcover romances which predate The Flame and the Flower.
Here's the abstract:
---
I don't want to single out Eccles unfairly, because this does seem to be a common opinion, but it's an incorrect one: "Since The Flame and the Flower is considered the first historical romance novel, ignoring Woodiwiss and her pioneering text was not an option" (4). Woodiwiss's novel is indeed an important text, and set off a the trend in US publishing for "bodice-rippers", but it's definitely not the first historical romance novel. Georgette Heyer, for example, had been writing historical romance novels for decades by then. Incidentally, when I went to check how Wikipedia refers to The Flame and the Flower, I found that it was stating that "It was also the first full-length romance novel to be published first in paperback rather than hardback." There may be differences of opinion regarding what should be considered the first "full-length" romance novel (for example, Pamela Regis' "exploration of the history of the romance novel in English begins with Pamela; or, Virtue Rewarded (1740)" (63)). However, it should be clear from the photographs of Rebecca Romney's selection of romance novels that there are many early first edition hardcover romances which predate The Flame and the Flower.