Category: Let’s Talk Tropes

Let's Talk Tropes

Let’s Talk Tropes: Fake Relationship

smutreportteam

Here’s a fun one for us! We just happened to have several fake relationship ARCs, so this month we’re talking about the fake relationship trope.

Books we’ll be reviewing this week

Bottom line: Do you like the fake relationship trope?

Erin: Even though I often think the reason the protagonists think they need a fake relationship is absolutely ridiculous, there is honestly nothing better than the angst associated with catching feelings when you weren’t supposed to because all the affection is just for show, right?

Holly: Yes. Full stop. (To refresh my memory, I scrolled through all the books we’d tagged as “fake relationship” and almost every time I got to one I’d reviewed, I’d be like, “OH YEAH! That book was great!!!!!!”)

Ingrid: For some reason, it’s a special kind of ridiculous that always hits the spot.

What criteria are required for a book to qualify as a fake relationship trope?

Erin: I like fake relationship as an all-encompassing term for fake dating, fake engagement, fake marriage, and any other iteration of partners who agree to pretend to have a romantic relationship because of Reasons. 

I would also argue that a true representation of the trope is a throughline, but an “I need a fake date” that sort of spirals into more works, too.

Holly: I agree with what Erin says, with the addendum that both parties in the fake relationship must know that the relationship is not real (at least at the outset) and are in general agreement about the terms of the relationship. There are also usually some boundaries about when and where the relationship is performed—and those boundaries inevitably get crossed, which is always a delightful moment.

Ingrid: It pretty much has to go from “it’s just harmless and temporary” to “oh no–have I caught feelings?” to “the other person clearly does not feel the same way” to “oh dear, what silly numpkins we are for not realizing we’ve been in love literally this ENTIRE TIME”.

What do you think is fun about the trope?

Erin: Nothing delights me more than “OMG I’m catching feelings, and that’s against the rules, and what am I going to doooooooo?”

It’s also a great format for a legitimately great comedy OR for a really angsty read (or maybe both?!), so it’s got depth.

Holly: The creativity! When we sum up the plots of books, we usually say, “They’re in a fake relationship for REASONS,” but the reasons vary so widely. What will those authors think of next??!? (I can’t wait.)

Ingrid: There are just so many ways to stoke the flames in these books because they have to pretend to do all the things we do when we’re actually falling in love with someone. So many opportunities to crank up the heat AND the tension, and it’s super fun.

What do you find problematic about the trope?

Erin: Unless the protagonists are looking at exploiting a legal loophole (I’m thinking of With You Forever by Chloe Liese in which a legal marriage gained access to a trust), it often relies on lying, which is not something I would endorse. But that’s kind of the point of the trope, too. They have to figure out that their initial choice maybe wasn’t the best or healthiest one, even if the ultimate outcome was good.

Also most of the time authors don’t seem to have a great understanding of how green card marriages work, but suspension of disbelief, okay. The one author I think handled the green card marriage story well was Mariana Zapata in The Wall of Winnipeg and Me, but the rest I’ve read are, uh, fantastical.

Holly: But here’s the thing: lying to whom and for what purpose? For example, in Hate Crush by Angelina M. Lopez and Act Like It by Lucy Parker, the protagonists are public figures who are set up by their managers to have public fake relationships specifically for media purposes. Is lying to the tabloids any better or worse than lying to the government to get health insurance or gain custody of some kids? (see: Learned Reactions or Best Fake Fiancée) Is it a bad thing to pretend to be engaged to someone you trust so that predatory creep will leave you alone? (see: The Brightest Star in Paris) Or is it even that terrible to lie to your toxic family and bring home a date so they just get off your back about not being married yet? (ok, so maybe the parents in Her Pretend Christmas Date aren’t toxic, but you get the idea)

Basically, what I’m saying is: Erin, whatever, lying isn’t that terrible. What was the question again?

Erin: Ugh, fine. But I was thinking of situations like The Wedding Crasher by Mia Sosa, in which Dean uses the relationship to get a leg up at work while Solange doesn’t directly address her family’s biases, or Sailor Proof by Annabeth Albert, in which Derrick is jealous and angry and wants to get back at his ex, or Muffin Top by Avery Flynn, in which Lucy’s self-esteem can’t handle her trip back home. Basically any story in which the protagonists are using the relationship to avoid addressing whatever problems they’re dealing with in a healthy and honest way. (Which includes Her Pretend Christmas Date, which I absolutely loved. Hello glasses and sweater vests!) It’s not that they don’t have a reason to do it, it’s that the reason is eek. A person’s boss should not be pressuring a person to be in a relationship, even if it’s fake. They might not even be caught out in their lies (although they often are), but putting a cute spin on an unhealthy starting point, while fun and even entirely understandable, is still at its root unhealthy.

Besides, the question is general, and I stand by my answer. Even though your argument is very good, and dynamic characters do have to start somewhere. But I challenge you to identify something problematic!

Holly: Usually I am an expert at teasing out problematic content, but I honestly can’t think of anything. Perfect trope is perfect. 

Ingrid: Uhm…so like, lying erodes trust and all that, and people always say that a relationship is built on trust so maybe that. I don’t find a problem with it, this trope tends to be pretty wholesome. Basically what you guys said just without all the evidence.

Do you think people actually have fake relationships? 

Holly: If you look at the whole list of reasons I gave above where it would be perfectly legitimate to lie about being in a relationship, then it becomes obvious that there’s no way that this doesn’t happen in real life. 

Erin: I mean, a fake date I could see. And a marriage of convenience that is for something like a green card or insurance coverage and not a ridiculous caveat in a will. But sometimes the lengths to which these characters seem to feel they need to go seems bananas. 

But I would definitely be game for a fake relationship, so there’s that.

Ingrid: No, that’s ridiculous. Who does that? That’s why it’s fun in books.

Why is this such a popular trope?

Holly: It’s both specific and extremely versatile. By that I mean that it’s specific in its beats: people have a performative relationship, the performance bleeds into the private space, feelings ensue, one or both parties wonder if it’s real. But within those beats, there’s so much space for widely different ways for the story to unfold, depending on how and to what extent the different beats are emphasized.

Erin: Holly’s spot on. I think I would add that it includes a very natural tension that doesn’t need any additional manufacturing. If a story is done well, the question that should have a good, clear answer all the way until the end is “Why can’t they be together right now?” (Thanks, Sarah MacLean!) A fake relationship starts with a clear problem and characters who have made a clear agreement, which, when the agreement falls apart, flows into new tension because one or both characters are failing to adhere to the initial agreement, having caught feelings.

Ingrid: Holly hit the nail on the head, yet again.

What’s one book you loved that features this trope? What’s so great about this book and the way it handles the trope?

Erin: Look, it’s Boyfriend Material. Not necessarily because of the trope (though the trope is absolute fake relationship perfection), but because it’s possibly the most hilarious book I’ve ever read in my life.

Another one that’s overall light-hearted and has a little fun with the trope is Boyfriend by Sarina Bowen. A college hockey player advertises being available as a perfect fake boyfriend every Thanksgiving so he doesn’t have to deal with family drama at home and he gets to have a fun experience. The woman who’s had a crush on him since she first served him at the local diner decides to take advantage of the opportunity he’s presented. Naturally, they keep swapping because they become friends…until their feelings turn more than friendly.

Holly: Act Like It by Lucy Parker is a phenomenal example of the fake relationship trope because both protagonists are stage actors who start dating as a PR stunt for the show they’re both in. The lines between what’s real and what’s pretend get real blurry real fast and it’s delicious. 

Since I’m contractually obligated to always recommend a historical romance when we talk tropes, Some Like it Scandalous by Maya Rodale is fun one! It’s one of those “let’s have a fake relationship to avoid having a real relationship” setups that is only found in romance novels.

And finally, D’Vaughn and Kris Plan a Wedding by Chencia C. Higgins introduces a fun twist: fake relationship by way of reality television! (My full review is dropping tomorrow, so I’ll save all my gushing for why this book is so great til then.)

Ingrid: Real Fake Love by Pippa Grant stood out to me–first of all, they really are an unlikely couple (Pro baseball player and a secretly famous romance writer who’s been engaged an obscene number of times). Second of all, I loved that it ends in a way that works for both of them–they’re such an unlikely pair that they ended up having to create their own version of happily ever after, and it just works. But basically, she needs help not falling in love with everyone, and he needs help learning how to actually commit to someone, so they have a fake relationship and live together in exchange for lessons. It’s nutty and fun, and really hits the spot!

Books we mentioned in our discussion:

Let's Talk Tropes

Let’s Talk Settings: Between the Wars

smutreportteam

Normally we do a buddy read focusing on a trope or archetype, but when we were talking about our goals for the year, Erin wanted to explore the setting of the 1920s. This (mostly) aligned with the TBR Challenge prompt for June: After the War, so we decided to do a “Between the Wars” week for our buddy read and discussion this month. 

(We note that Holly and Ingrid may not, in fact, choose to read a book set between WWI and WWII for the TBR Challenge, to which notice Erin offered a disappointed pouty face.)

This is a historical romance setting where we haven’t read a lot, so if you have some that we shouldn’t miss, drop the titles below!

Bottom line: Do you like the 1920s-1930s setting?

Holly: With the caveat that I’ve only read, like, three romance novels set in the Interwar Period, I’m going to say yes. 

Erin: You know, I do. I don’t know why I find this somewhat surprising considering this time period formed the basis for my college thesis.

Ingrid: I have read very few of these books, but the ones I read were very good. 

Beyond the datestamp, what would you expect to see in a book set in this period?

Holly: I expect that the characters are probably processing some trauma, either from World War I (see, for example, The Quid Pro Quo by A.L. Lester) or the financial insecurity of the Great Depression. 

I also expect there to be some social upheaval going on in the background. This period was incredibly politically turbulent in both the US and Europe. 

Erin: What I would first expect is Prohibition with some Jazz Age Gatsby-type imagery (art deco covers, amiright?), and then the Depression with its job shortages and increases in legitimized radical movements (I’m talking about Communism, but also this is the period of the Catholic Worker Movement, so socialist ideas are everywhere), plus Jim Crow…but actually this is an extremely rich period in terms of post-war recovery (that doesn’t go very well), shifting wealth (wealth disparities), and the resultant social movements. Also, Prohibition is only in the U.S. so that’s very limited. Also, also, WWI marked a significant shift in how warfare was conducted between nation-states, including who was involved, so I do expect to see repercussions of that as society shifts back into a non-wartime lifestyle but with the mental specters of the war still present.

Ingrid: I think I’d say an undercurrent of upheaval simply from the time…plus, the presence of some opulence v poverty. Maybe a few references to “progress” and “change”. 

What do you think is fun about the setting?

Holly: This setting is incredibly rich, creating tons of opportunity for authors to tap into historical events. In the US, we’ve got Prohibition and the rise of organized crime; we’ve got the Harlem Renaissance; we’ve got the Great Migration. 

Erin: Politically and socially it’s an interesting period, with more modern elements than Gilded Age or Victorian settings, but also it predates most of our modern social and political markers that occurred after WWII. There are cars and airplanes, but no computers. Social movements that we might have studied in 20th C. history are present but not in the context of today. There are still class divides, but the Industrial Revolution and the rise of New Money industrialists presents a different cast than does a landowning aristocracy and a sociopolitical landscape centered in monarchy or landed gentry. 

But mostly the radical movements of the early 20th century are the most fun. I mean, we all like our weekends, right?! 

Ingrid: I agree with Holly—there are a lot of perspectives that could come from this time period with wildly different feelings and outcomes. There’s just so much going on!

What do you find problematic about the setting?

Holly: This is the flip side of the fun part of the setting—we also see the rise of the Nazi party in Germany and the whole Communism thing in Russia. Let’s not fall into the trap of romanticizing mass murderers, mkay?

Erin: In and of itself, nothing. Depending on the author’s background and understanding of the historical landscape, however, it would be really easy to neglect to acknowledge what’s going on in the landscape. A story about a Dupont-type character could very easily overlook everything that’s going on with race and class and money in this period. A story with an exclusively white cast would probably overlook a lot of the legalized racism occurring. Etc. So basically it’s the same as other historical romance? 

Ingrid: That’s all very, very true. And in today’s climate, that could hit a bit differently than it might have years ago.

What’s one book you loved that features this setting? What’s so great about this book and the way it handles the setting?

Holly: “Let Us Dream” by Alyssa Cole is a novella set in 1917 New York (so I guess it’s technically not the Interwar Period, but it’s close) and it’s fabulous. The problems and triumphs of the characters are really specific to their time and place. (I talk about it in more detail in my review of the anthology Daughters of the Nation.) 

I also enjoyed Trouble and Strife by Laura Kinsey. Unlike basically everything I’ve talked about in my discussion of the time period, this book is very quiet and domestic. There’s not a lot of political or social upheaval going on, but there’s still a very strong sense of place (Birmingham, 1931).

Erin: In my attempt to prep for the TBR Challenge this month, I found that I actually have several on my TBR list that I’ll just have to bump forward, because I haven’t actually read that many, and I really like what authors are doing with the setting. So I might have more to say later.

To answer the question, it wasn’t the first I read, but Spellbound by Allie Therin (and the whole Magic in Manhattan trilogy) managed to ensorcel me (see what I did there?) not only with the magical intrigue but also because Therin really did consider so many different identities—class, race, sexuality, and their intersectionality—in such a wonderful way as she also unpacked other trauma, including Arthur’s post-war recovery and Rory’s childhood of abuse and abandonment. I really appreciate that many of the authors I’ve been reading who have published in the past couple years have been conscious of the great scope of what was happening during this period (which I will also discuss in my K.J. Charles and Jordan L. Hawk reviews this week).

Ingrid: Forever Eve and After Eve by JB Lexington was pretty trippy feeling and interesting! 

Books we mentioned in our discussion:

Let's Talk Tropes

Let’s Talk Tropes: Accidental Pregnancy

smutreportteam

When we were discussing our goals for this year, Holly said she wanted to talk about the accidental pregnancy trope even though she hates it. So here we are! 

As usual, we’re starting the month with a discussion of the trope, but we have to say in advance…none of us is super pumped about it. If you’re an accidental pregnancy trope lover, we’d love to hear from you about your faves and why you love them!

Accidental Pregnancy Covers of romance novels: Make Me Yours by Katee Robert I Think I might Need You by Christina C. Jones Scoring the Player's Baby by Naima Simone
Books we’ll be reviewing this week
Continue reading “Let’s Talk Tropes: Accidental Pregnancy” →
Let's Talk Tropes

Let’s Talk Subgenres: Rom-Coms

smutreportteam

Bottom line: Do you like Rom-coms?

Holly: If a rom-com is done well, there’s nothing better. The problem is finding the ones that are done well.

Erin: I do really love them, but I typically don’t seek them out because the marketing is often so spectacularly bad for the label. 

Ingrid: I probably seek out rom-coms more than anything else, but I’ll also admit that I DNF these the most. With rom-coms, either the humor and romance are BOTH crackling, or it just doesn’t work.

What criteria are required for a book to qualify as a Rom-com?

Holly: It needs to be a romance, and it needs to be funny. 

That sounds simple, but it isn’t always. For example, books by Jenny Holiday, Lucy Parker, and Kate Clayborn are sometimes called rom-coms—and they all have funny bits and excellent romance, but they also feature characters dealing with serious issues like grief, illness, or trauma. I do laugh when I read books by these authors, but I also cry buckets. 

Erin: My expectation is similar to Holly’s. When we were looking at what to read for this week, I reviewed several lists, and I’d already read most of the books included in them, and I would not have categorized them as rom-coms. The levity must outweigh the serious issues, so either the issues aren’t super heavy serious (think The Worst Best Man by Mia Sosa) or the issues are presented in a humorous or sardonic way (think Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall).

Ingrid: I think both Erin and Holly make excellent points. And, I’ll admit that in retrospect some of the titles that moved me the most were rom-coms that elicited a very broad range of emotions.

What do you think is fun about the subgenre?

Erin: It’s specifically designed to evoke laughter and spark joy. Theoretically I suppose all romance – with all the happy and optimistic endings – should spark joy, but romantic comedies are designed to do so in a way that other stories are not. The catharsis of getting through an angsty book fills one emotional need, but the laughter that we get from rom-coms fills a completely different one. Which is why it’s such a bummer when the label isn’t right.

Ingrid: Well, laughing releases a lot of happy hormones the same way reading about love does. So I think rom-coms tend to really fill the reader up with a bubbly happiness that lingers, and I find that absolutely wonderful.

What do you find problematic about the subgenre?

Holly: This is not about the books in and of themselves, but rather about marketing. It seems like every contemporary romance is marketed as a “rom-com,” regardless of content. Part of this is that humor is really personal, so what one person finds humorous, another will find cringeworthy. Another is that people have different thresholds for how much humor is needed for a book to be a comedy. Should I be rolling on the floor laughing the whole time? Can it also deal with serious topics? How much seriousness can balance the levity before a book becomes more a contemporary romance with some jokes than a rom-com? 

To give a specific example, I picked up Three Little Words by Jenny Holiday because all of the cover blurbs talk about how funny this book is. Imagine how shocked I was to discover that the heroine had an eating disorder and the hero was a recovering drug addict who was estranged from his parents. Let’s just say this book was not all sunshine and rainbows and I felt very lied to. (It was still an excellent book.)

Erin: This is also not specifically problematic as such (though it can certainly veer into that space), but as Holly mentioned, the humor is subjective, and sometimes that doesn’t jive with the reader. Maybe the book is completely absurd, and the reader has no patience for that, so they say it’s not funny. Maybe it’s full of banter, and the reader doesn’t enjoy it, so they say it’s not funny. I often fall into a category where I don’t think that the behavior of the characters is particularly amusing because their maturity levels don’t seem to match whatever my expectations are for them. OR – and this is where the actually problematic stuff comes in – maybe the jokes are made at the expense of others in order to get a laugh, and that’s just not cool. 

Holly: Erin’s totally right. I definitely DNFed a book marketed as a rom-com because all the jokes were of the Men are from Mars / Women are from Venus school of thought, with a sprinkling of fat-shaming thrown in for good measure. (It was Hot Winter Nights by Jill Shalvis.)

Ingrid: YES. I can pretty easily skate right past jokes that just don’t land with me, but nothing makes me walk away from rooting for a relationship like watching a hero or a heroine crack jokes at someone else’s expense, or play up tired and hurtful stereotypes. And I love banter, but when it’s just constant one-upmanship, that’s gets very old as well.

What kind of humor do you look for in a Rom-com?

Holly: I think that rom-coms come in a couple of distinct flavors. There are banter rom-coms, where the humor comes from really sharp dialogue; think Julia Quinn. There are voice rom-coms, where the humor comes from a strong narrative voice, usually told in 1st POV; think Mia Sosa. And then there are situational or slapstick rom-coms; think Pippa Grant. 

If I’m reading something purely for the humor, I tend to prefer voice rom-coms. I can buy a lot more snark as a character’s internal voice than as part of their dialogue with others. Too much banter just makes me tired.

Erin: I also love a strong narrative voice (both Mia Sosa and Alexis Hall have this), but I also find situational humor funny. When one thing after another went wrong for the protagonists in I Think I Might Love You by Christina C. Jones, it totally made the book. The beats were all just perfect and nothing felt forced. Actually, in all three of the books I’ve mentioned so far, it was probably the combination of voice PLUS situational humor that made me laugh out loud over and over again.

Ingrid: I feel like I tend to binge a bunch of one type, tire of it, find a new schtick, love it, read everything that hits like that, tire of it…etc. I read it all, and I just cycle right on through.

What’s one rom-com you loved? What’s so great about this book and why is it so funny?

Erin: Y’all, I’m still selling Boyfriend Material to anyone who will buy it. I laughed so hard I cried reading it more than once. As in, more than one instance the first time I read it, and also more than once because I’ve read it several times. In the first place, Luc is completely ridiculous and he knows it, but also he’s got co-workers that interact with him in just the funniest ways, and now I think I want to read it again… (Alex Twaddle 4eva!)

Ingrid: The last series that got me going was the Leveling Up series by K.F. Breene. Unfortunately, the series isn’t done. And Holly said she didn’t laugh as hard as I did…but I really, REALLY laughed with that one.

Holly: My go-to rom-com that I’ve been recommending for years is A Week to be Wicked by Tessa Dare. However, I haven’t read it since it came out, uh, ten years ago, so maybe I should reread it and see if it still stands up as my platonic ideal of a historical rom-com?

Books we mentioned in this discussion:

Let's Talk Tropes

Let’s Talk Archetypes: Merpersons

smutreportteam

When we made our 2022 Smut Resolutions, Ingrid requested that we take a closer look at smut with merfolk. So here we are, kicking off a full week of nothing but mermaids.

Bottom line: Do you like the merperson archetype?

Holly: I am the right age and temperament where Disney’s The Little Mermaid was my number one favorite movie of all time growing up. So I have a soft spot for merfolk, which is ironic because the idea of being on (or even worse, in) the ocean scares the bejeezus out of me. Also, now that I come to think of it, I can’t say that I’ve read all that much mer-smut.

Erin: Ingrid and I totally pretended to be mermaids in the pool when we were kids, AND I grew out my bangs so they could be like Ariel’s (spoiler, they never actually were), AND I have advanced open water diver certification, but I have never sought out mer smut and it’s not really one on my list of “Gotta try, this is gonna be bananas!”

Ingrid: I actually suggested we do a mermaid deep dive (see what I did there) because I was feeling sassy and didn’t think there was mer-smut. I was so very mistaken. I mean, Erin’s right—we were obsessed with mermaids and although I have since found Ariel’s age to be a bit off putting I was very curious once we actually started digging in.

What criteria are required for a book to qualify as merperson romance?

Holly: One of the MCs has to have a fish tail and live underwater. Shapeshifting is allowed, but not required.

Erin: Yeah that’s pretty much it.

Ingrid: Yup.

What do you think is fun about the archetype?

Holly: There’s a lot of space for angst because the MCs are literally from different habitats. To quote Tevye, “A bird may love a fish, but where would they make their home?” So authors can explore ideas of how really different people can make a relationship work. 

Erin: I mean, sure, what Holly said. OR they have to figure out how sex works because there’s a tail there. 

Ingrid: I want to say my mind went straight to Tevye and philosophy like Holly but actually I’m with Erin. 

What do you find problematic about the archetype?

Holly: So, with the caveat that I haven’t read much mermaid smut in mind, there is definitely the opportunity for some self-sacrificial nonsense. Going back to my girl Ariel, there is a strong case of “I will give up everything I know, including my body, for love.” 

Erin: I’ve been trying to think of something else that would be uniquely problematic for this archetype, but I really can’t. Changing your entire world and your body for love is pretty huge. 

Ingrid: Why don’t they have gills? They never have gills. 

Holly: They definitely have gills!!! At least in all the books I read for this week they do. Sometimes they even have gills in human form.

Ingrid: whaaaaaaat…

How might merfolk romances differ from other types of paranormal romances? 

Holly: I suspect that merfolk romances are less codified than vampire or shifter romances, for two reasons. First, because there are fewer of them, so there hasn’t been time for a genre standard to develop. Second, there are three really different strands of mermaid lore in the widely-known source material. There’s the little mermaid, who sacrifices her life under the sea to live on land for true love. There are sirens, who lure unwary sailors to their underwater deaths. And there is Mami Wata of African and Caribbean folklore, who, like the sirens, is associated with sex, but is much more powerful.

If you’re writing a vampire romance you’re part of a larger conversation with the tons of vampire romances already written; you’re probably referencing Dracula or Interview with a Vampire, at least obliquely. When I pick up a vampire romance, I know that there’s going to be blood and guilt—or that the author will be explicitly playing with (and potentially rejecting) those conventions. In contrast, when I pick up a mermaid romance, I really don’t know what to expect.

Ingrid: Well, my first thought is that these romances would take place underwater. And then, you know…what Holly said.

Holly: Jumping back in to say that there seems to be an explosion of mermaid smut happening, so the archetype might solidify a bit more as it becomes more popular. We’ll find out!

Erin: I don’t have much to add except that I’d prefer it if they weren’t just shifters like every other shifter—having to make difficult choices to completely physically change (for any reason, not just love) gives the merfolk certain high stakes. 

What’s one book you loved that features merfolk? What’s so great about this book and the way it handles the archetype?

Holly: So I think I’d only read two mer-smuts, like, ever before I started reading for this week. One was the short story Marine Biology by G.L. Carriger, and one was the Daughters of Arianne series by Joey W. Hill (review coming on Friday). A lot of the action takes place on land in these books, and we don’t see a lot of the merfolk society—the Carriger is too short to get into a lot of details beyond the immediate plot, and the mermaids in the Hill books are isolated from the larger underwater society for various reasons. I’m not sure if that’s common in mermaid stories—again, hearkening back to Disney’s Ariel and her sense of isolation from life under the sea—but it makes it hard for me to really get a handle on the archetype. No recs, sorry. 

Ingrid: I haven’t read a single one prior to the novella I just reviewed (which doesn’t really count because she was just role playing as a mermaid). So I’m going in with a pretty open mind and very few preconceived ideas of what mermaid smut should or could be like! It’s going to be fun…

Erin: I think I’ve read one? I’ve DNFed a few. But what with shifters in play, I can tangentially recommend Ocean’s Light by Nalini Singh because the DarkSea pack is super interesting and almost the whole book takes place underwater. Or, now that Holly mentioned sirens, Catalina Baylor really comes into her badass boss prime self in Emerald Blaze by Ilona Andrews. Neither book ACTUALLY includes any merfolk, though, sorry.

Books mentioned in this discussion:

Have you read much mer-romance? What do you think of the merperson archetype? Have any recommendations for us?