Not that we haven’t already covered this before, but Hilary Sares, Kensington Aphrodisia editor, said it again.
From HelenKay Dimon’s blog, where she writes about RWA and more specifically, the Kensington presentation. The emphasis in bold is mine.
**In the never-ending Aphrodisia v. Brava debate, the editors say: Aphrodisia is about sex and Brava is about romance. Hillary Sares (the main Aphrodisia editor) says the term “erotic romance” with the imprint is a misnomer. The books are not really romance and don’t have to be. Use of the title is for marketing – Kensington wants the books in the romance section and wants to reach romance readers. That’s it. And, the only legal on the sex is that it be legal.
I know, I know, we beat this dead horse before, but still, this…bothers me…as a romance reader and seller, because it feels so very dishonest. The books are not really romance and don’t have to be. Use of the title is for marketing
. It feels like writing a young adult novel and marketing it as romance, because it will sell better. If it’s not romance, and the publisher says it’s not, then what is their obligation to the reader?
**keeping in mind that this is HelenKay quoting from a speech given from Hilary Sares, so it’s not a direct quote. But I’m going to assume that HelenKay is savvy enough not to misquote an editor from her own publisher.