Sunday, June 20, 2010

I suppose it takes all types

Sometimes people boggle me. I often visit AAR - I love their site for the interesting topics, the reviews, the message boards, and while at times I may disagree with some of what I read, there is no question the staff and visitors do and say what they do for the love of romance and it was there that I first found my 'people'. Where I think of blogging as small gatherings of good friends, I think of AAR as a 'neighbourhood party' kind of place.

And I suppose with every neighbourhood party, you are going to get one of your rude and nasty neighbour types. I just happened to see that one of the rudest, nastiest neighbourhood types dropped by to start an interesting topic - looking for romance books that don't have a HEA. Well I think the vast majority of us hold the belief that if there is no HEA, it isn't a romance book; a romantic book perhaps, but not a romance. Apparently the rude neighbour didn't like that she wasn't getting what she wanted and left this comment:

I 'closed' this thread because I wasn't really getting any suggestions like I had asked for. Instead I was getting five out of eight people telling me that you can't have a romance novel without the HEA. I DID NOT ask anyone what their definition of a romance book was or any of the other crap I got. I simply asked for suggestions. Nothing more. If no one had any suggestions then there was no reason for them to reply.

I closed the topic and someone from AAR took it upon herself to reopen it AND send me a private message. I'm really irritated with that.

As you can see, what was a topic about wanting suggestions for romances without a HEA has turned into all of you giving your opinions on something that was NEVER asked for.

I think she just won the 'rudest most nastiest comment' award that I've ever seen there. What really got me is that it isn't her site. If you follow the thread, there are some interesting replies. And for this person to take this attitude makes me want to bitch slap her. As one of the commenter's replied "It's an open discussion forum."

After reading her nasty comment, to me it's not then a surprise she's looking for books that don't have the HEA. As I said, Friday I was in a snarly mood most of the day, but still I wouldn't do the kind of thing this person did - at someone else's 'place'.

Am I the only one that feels this way - that when visiting someone's blog or message board it's just not 'the thing' to be nasty? Disagree sure - that's what makes for interesting discussion, but to take it to this extent? I just don't get it.

I loathe the phrase "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all", loathe it with a passion after being raised on it. But there is taking that and going too far in the other direction. And I think this person just did that.


And an update on the battle of wills going on in the house

Destructo Cat: 27
Brent: 0

Already this morning Brent's brought her up 4 times


Scorpio M. said...

I hear you Kristie, there are many Negative Nellies out there. What bugs me most are people who say mean, uncalled for, impolite things under the guise of 'honesty' and of course, freedom of speech (yes, I know your Constitutional rights)...don't hate me but that is one of the reasons why I try to avoid DEAR AUTHOR. The posters there are simply too snarky and when the reviews are negative the pile-on effect is unbelievable. Rude, crass, not my cup of tea.

Anna Carrasco Bowling said...

To me (the one who posted the RWA definition of romance novel) it's as possible to have a romance novel with no HEA as it is water that isn't wet. I'm not sure what the OP is asking for in this post or what the offense is. They may not feel like sharing, and that's fine, but I'm with you; when visiting someone else's home, it's nice to be nice.

Katt said...

I was recently told,
A ROMANCE, has a HEA... period.

ROMANTIC FICTION, on the other hand, may end otherwise.

Anonymous said...

That poster is notorious for her temper tantrums and flounces at the Romantic Times board. It's even ruder considering she almost never posts at AAR, so is practically a stranger.

Wendy said...

Kristie: You need to stop posting that picture of the demented cat. It gives me nightmares! LOL

Kristie (J) said...

Anonymous: Temper tantrum is right! Good grief - what a nutty thing to get her knickers knotted over. I must still have my bitch on as I can't see why other posters are still being nice to her :-) And *laughing* I seem to have issues with the RT board. I registered quite some time ago and completely forgot my password and user name. But I can't register again as every time I try, it says I already am.

Katt: I think a lot of us see things in two different ways *g*. To me, the HEA is required. If I were to buy a romance book in the romance section of the book store and upon finishing it, discovered that there was no HEA, the hero/heroine don't end up together somehow, I would be very upset. But if I were to buy a romantic book in a different section of the bookstore and there was no HEA, I would probably still be upset but more from the lack of HEA in an emotional upset - but not upset that there wasn't one in general since it wasn't shelved in the romance section - if you understand what I just said *grinning*

Anna: One of the problems (for me) with a romance not having a HEA is it takes away the safety net I read under. I TRUST romance books to have a HEA and if it starts happening where there isn't one in a romance book shelved in the romance department, well, my whole trust in the genre would be rocked at it's core :-)
I went through years of reading books where there was no guarantee of a HEA and I handled it because they weren't marketed as romance so I knew there was a risk. But when reading a romance book marketed as romance, I don't want that risk

Scorpio: I think we all get our mad on at times, but to as anonymous put it so well - to have that kind of temper tantrum is so immature.

Wendy: ROTFL!!!! I LOVE that demented cat pic. It's so dang creepy. And it just seemed to fit *g*

Leslie said...

I'm with Wendy about the cat but I'm not sure if it is a cat or some bizarre hybrid from a UF novel. LOL

After reading the thread I don't get why she was upset. It looked like responders were trying to explain why she might not get many suggests from the board since it is a romance centric forum. In spite of that she did get a number of suggests so I don't know why she didn't just say thanks and leave it at that.

Disclosure: I do use the phrase that you detest. I use it with the boys when they get into it and I know the next thing coming out of their mouths will not only be rude but will add to their argument. I do use it sparingly. :)

Kristie (J) said...

Leslie: *laughing oh well using it with boys is an entirely different thing - having two of those strange creatures myself, I know that they love to trash talk. For me, I think it's more related to us women not supposed to have a right to our own opinion or not to show anger. We must always be nice, proper little girls. I think that's why it's a hot button for me. It's the always having to be "nice" even if we aren't in the mood or someone done us wrong that gets my nighty knotted.
And I don't get why she's upset either. It wasn't so much that she was upset though, as the 'tude that she took that I found annoying and rude. Thus - my sarcastic reply.

Carolyn said...

Jeez Kristy - that cat again!! Aaak!

I suppose this time it fits though *grin*.

In all fairness to DA, there have been folks banned or with their remarks monitored when they consistently go too far. I've felt the urge to jump someone many the time for a post, but just about everyone on that board can take me with one hand tied behind their backs, lol.

Anyway, usually someone says what I wanted to say anyway.

It's very bad manners though and sounds so condescending.

azteclady said...


Yes, I wanna go rubberneck, sue me :-P

azteclady said...

Never mind, found it.

Kaetrin said...

Well count me in the camp that says no HEA = not a romance. I HATE reading a book or seeing a movie with no HEA (it's even worse where there's no ending at all and it just stops or is totally ambiguous - but I realise that's just me *grins*).

As for comments - I think it's okay to disagree but I don't think there's any need to be rude.
Plus, Karma has a way of biting one in the ass.

(In this case, I am struggling to understand why she even bothered asking the question at AAR - that would be kinda like going into a wine tasting club and asking for recommendations for drinks which didn't have grapes...)

orannia said...

I like Katt's definition :)

And does Brent know cats have infinite patience?

Kristie (J) said...

Orannia: I don't think he quite understands Destructo yet. Obviously I named her that for a reason. She was supposed to be Cally, but after endlessly trying to stop her from destroying things around the house - she became Destructo.

Kaetrin: LOL!! I love that analogy!!! She certainly went to the wrong place - and took the wrong attitude!!

Carolyn: ROTFL!! I love that cat. For some with a somewhat warped sense of humour at times, I thinks it's fun. And it looks about as happy I imagine as that poster *g*.

Mitzi H. said...

I should always be courteous to those that come to visit.....I guess everyone should have just said...."Sorry, don't know of any"....Period, and left it at that????

Kristie (J) said...

Mitzi: I know!! She went way overboard as far as I'm concerned!

Anonymous said...

That poster has issues. I also see IT on the Amazon boards; there is no escaping it. You would think with the many forums it is on, it would have a clue about the nature of organic discussions on the internet.

Anyway, I noticed that the poster has at least 2 accounts on the AAR boards. It also posts as "Sapphire". You would think that AAR would have some rules against having more than one account but I didnt see one. It also has multiple accounts on the RT forum and constantly changes it's name on Amazon (must be harder to get a new account there).