Romance is not a novel
Sir Walter Scott in his “Essay on Romance” established a basic difference between romance and a novel. While he considered the first story, which consisted of wonderful and unusual events, he saw the novel as a work that reflected society; which explains why he wrote so many historical novels.
Literary romances
Nathaniel Hawthorne writes in his preface to The House of the Seven Gables: “When a writer calls his work a romance, it is hardly necessary to observe that he wishes to demand a certain latitude, and of its fashion and material which he would not have. suppose he confessed to writing a novel. “
According to latitude Hawthorne means that the author takes the liberty of managing his “atmospheric resource” and also injecting the wonderful. While in love, the writer can create an atmosphere of enchantment, of magic, or even a frightening or disturbing atmosphere that bears little resemblance to reality, in a novel almost impossible – unless the genre allows such freedoms. Novels like Garcia Marquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude or even JK Rowlings ’Harry Potter novel series are packed with such unlikely events that defy the cessation of disbelief. But this is allowed, because the novels belong to the genre of magical realism.
Hawthorne adds: “This last form of compound [the novel] presumably aimed at a very small fidelity, not only to the possible, but to the probable and ordinary course of human experience. “
Indeed, readers expect a “fidelity” or realism from what we see, feel, and experience in the material world, and this can be rendered only in a novel. When Herman Melville wrote his short story or short story, “Bartleby, the Scrivener,” which he set up on Wall Street, he knew he was writing a romance. In this work we find both a scary, ghostly and characterful atmosphere that cannot be expected to be real. In particular, it can be argued that the protagonist Bartleby is more like an alien being (ghost or spirit) than a real person.
Canadian critic Northrop Frye in his Anatomy of Criticism writes: “The essential difference between a novel and romance lies in the concept of characterization. Romance does not attempt to create ‘real people’ as much as stylized figures that spread into psychological archetypes (304) . “
Besides Bartleby, Melville wrote Billy Budd, another short story in which the characters are ‘stylized figures’ with whom Melville explores the depths of the human psyche.
Formula and Trashy romances
When we read “formulaic romances” or frivolous romances, we know that the characters – especially the lovers – push credibility as they deal with the insurmountable barriers they encounter before they can discover love. Readers are not bothered by the rapid blows, obstacles and other obstacles; in fact, they welcome them as kind-hearted frustrations that will ultimately prevail.
However by today’s standards, artistically, the romance is a few notches lower than the novel. Rarely will readers view romances as serious works of art – or as literature, unless they are the product of genius writers like Hawthorne and Melville. And unfortunately contemporary Romance writers do not come close to any literary genius.
