This article is part of “Romancing the Smithie,” a series of interviews with Smith alums writing in the romance genre conducted by Sophian Features writers. To explore more articles in this series, click on the author’s names: Sylvie Fox, Shannon O’Brien, Karelia Stetz-Waters, Meredith Wild. Links will be available as articles are published around Valentine’s weekend.
How does one begin to describe the awesomeness that is Sarah Maclean? She’s the bestselling author of more than a dozen delightfully written historical romances, one half of the fabulous duo behind the “Fated Mates” podcast, romance columnist for the Washington Post and probably the fiercest advocate for the romance genre you’ll ever come across. Oh, and did we mention she’s a Smithie? The Sophian chatted with Maclean over the phone one Saturday to learn about her journey into romance writing, her recommendations for Smithies new to the genre, and what she thinks the romance community should do to move toward a more equitable future.
Chichi Tsai: How did you become a romance novelist? What was your journey?
Sarah Maclean: I’m a romance novelist, yes — but I’m a romance reader first. I have an older sister who reads romance novels, and I read my first one when I was ten or eleven and I never looked back. I went all through high school reading romance novels, sneaking them inside my textbooks in class in high school. And then when I got to Smith actually, I was in Lamont house – and this group of women in Lamont house had romance novels and loved them. I’m told it’s gone now, but there was this romance novel library and it was willed down every year by graduating seniors to someone else in the house. And I had the collection for two years, during my junior and senior year. It was two bookshelves worth; we had extra bookshelves for it. I was told it was given to the house when it got too big and it was kept in the living room. And then it disappeared; someone told me maybe it was in a basement somewhere?
But what’s amazing about that is, when I was at Smith, I was an American studies major and I did papers on romance novels and anytime I could talk about romance novels academically I did. But those books that were in that Lamont house library were so cool because they were filled with marginalia from students who had annotated the books. You’d be reading, you know, a hero doing something horrible and in the margins there’d be writing like, “What an asshole!” And I’m really sad because all that marginalia has been lost to history.
CT: That’s amazing. It’s like going to a movie theater and sharing other people’s reactions to the movie.
SM: Yeah! And then I graduated from Smith, I went to New York and I worked in publishing and I had a friend who had a friend who was looking for a historical YA novel and I said, well, I’ve been reading romance novels my whole life. Like, what about a historical romance novel? And I wrote my first book, “The Season,” which was YA, for that editor. And then I turned the corner and I was like, “I don’t want to write clean.” So I wrote “Nine Rules to Break When Romancing A Rake,” and I never looked back. I was destined for this. I did not tumble into romance novels — it was in my DNA.
CT: I remember reading an interview with Lisa Kleypas, who’s also a Seven Sisters alum in historical romance, where she spoke about her struggles coming to terms with writing what a lot of her Wellesley classmates thought of as not a “meaningful” “literary” novels. I was wondering if you had any similar difficulties reconciling this Smith education and writing romance, and what your experience was?
SM: Truth be told, I’ve been shamed on Smith campus since I started writing romance novels by professors and students. And that sucks, for sure. Because what we’re really doing is talking about women in sex and in sexuality; we’re honoring the female gaze as a sexual experience. Sex is on the page in romance. You’ve got orgasms in romance. But there’s no shame in romance for those things being there. But then because of that being part and parcel to the romance novel reading experience, there comes with it a lot of the baggage that comes with the idea of women and sex. Like it or not, there is a certain amount of second wave feminist theory that lends itself to believing that anything that that discusses sex and women is somehow antifeminist. Which of course is pure and utter nonsense.
I’ve said this a thousand times in a thousand different ways: romance is feminist. Romance is the single genre of literature that enters women in power and happiness and pleasure as a necessity. The singular rule of romance novels is happily ever after. And if we can’t look at happiness as power and happiness as having value — and the fact that this genre is designed to show women in partnership parity in all the things that we talk about as being valuable and important to our agenda as women and marginalized people — then we have a problem.
But I will say, I think it has gotten better over the years. Certainly for a long time, the Smith Alumnae Quarterly was not interested in talking about romance novels despite the fact that J.R. Ward is one of the most famous alums and one of the best-selling writers of all time. But then recently that’s changed. I think I’ve heard from the English department that they’re not interested in having romance novelists speak as part of their work, and you know, that’s fine. American Studies has always welcomed us with open arms. The library has always welcomed us with open arms. But the idea that for some reason this genre of literature isn’t valuable? I think it’s important especially at a place like Smith to have a conversation about why that might be.
CT. That’s true. I realized — I didn’t even know J.R. Ward was a Smithie until I started searching for Smith romance novelists for this article. I was really surprised that it wasn’t more publicized and that there weren’t more alum panels with people in romance given the enormous amount of Smith graduates who are prominent in the romance publishing industry.
SM: Yeah, I mean where’s J.R. Ward’s Smith College medal? Smith College medals like the Rally Day medals are always given to remarkable women, people who absolutely are deserving — like, throw a stone in a room full of Smithies and you’re going to find somebody amazing. But I think you’d be hard pressed to find somebody as successful and has been more transformative to a genre of literature than someone like J.R. Ward.
CT: You write in the historical romance subgenre and — please correct me if I’m wrong, I really do not know my British history — most of your books take place in Regency and pre-Victorian era England. What is it about this setting and time period that attracts not only you but so many historical romance writers? Is there something about this time period that makes a particularly fitting one to tell your stories?
SM: I think it’s twofold. One, I think it’s impossible to ignore the influence that Jane Austen has had on the genre. Jane Austen was basically the first contemporary romance novelist. When we hear Austen scholars talk about Austen in her time, what they often say is, “She has such a wit! She has such a discerning eye! She has a keen understanding of the way society works and the way people in society interact with each other.” Austen was able to tell those stories with an incredible sort of nuance and honesty. She was making fun of things that were happening around her and iterating things that were happening around her and pointing fingers at things that were problematic or silly or laughable in society. And that’s fundamentally what romance novels do. They take women’s space and marginalized space and they iterate it and they tell all the story of the world that –in my case— that women specifically are living in our society.
So I constantly have the conversation and ask the question of: How different are we really? How is the patriarchy different for us now? Is it different for us now? I’m really interested in the patriarchy – that is, in how we smash it, how it impacts us, how it impacts men and how it impacts relationships with men. But I don’t think I’ll ever read a book that isn’t somewhat about patriarchy and for me being able to have that conversation within the closed circle context of a historical setting allows me to sometimes even say things that are harder to say in contemporary novels, I think.
CT: One of my favourite things in the past few years has been the rise in popularity of podcasts aimed at the romance reading community. Podcasts like “The Wicked Wallflowers Club Podcast,” ”Heaving Bosoms,” and of course “Fated Mates,” the podcast you host with romance critic Jen Prokop about Kresley Cole’s “Immortals After Dark” series. While I haven’t read the “Immortals After Dark” series yet, I’ve really enjoyed the interstitials episodes where you discuss romance novels by trope. What are the romance tropes you’re currently into right now?
SM: That’s a good question. I don’t actually read for tropes, though like all romance readers I instinctively know when a trope is being handled really well. My very favorite trope is enemies to lovers. It goes back to what I said before about I don’t think I’ll ever write a story that’s not about patriarchy. I think the story of enemies to lovers is about smashing the patriarchy again and again and again. Because the hero of the romance novel, for me, really represents that. He’s not human until the end of the book. In the beginning, he’s still the patriarchy. You know, even when he’s good — even when he’s not terrible. Because the story of romance as a whole is a story for equality. So enemies to lovers really just highlights that when it’s done well.
But you know, there are many delicious tropes out there. I mean, I love “there’s only one bed.” I love road trip romances. I love anything where a few people are forced into proximity with each other. And that’s actually quite hard in contemporary right? One of the other reasons why I love historicals is because I don’t have to worry about two people, you know, just ghosting each other. Now it’s a modern world. You don’t like someone, you really never have to interact with them.
CT: Yeah. Just get an Uber, get out of there!
SM: Exactly! Like, ghost them and be done! I really like a contemporary where people who can’t stand each other are forced to spend time with each other and then of course fall in love.
CT: What are some gateway romance books that you would recommend for the Smithie who’s a little skeptical about romance?
SM: My first recommendation is Adrianna Herrera, who writes queer romances set in New York city. My favorite one to date is “American Love Story.” One of the heroes is a black lives matter activist and a professor and the other hero is an assistant district attorney. It’s like I said, all romance novels are really about power. So the relationship is very much about two people who are both on the same side politically. They’re not — I mean, I think there are certain things that can’t be done. I think it’s not believable right now to do a romance where there’s a Republican and a Democrat. But, I think that what Adrianna has done is she’s written two people who are both on the side of right. But one of them is an activist and one of them is within the system, and so the conflict between them is really powerful and I think it’s something that people will really relate to.
I would also recommend Lisa Kleypas’ Wallflowers series. You don’t have to read them in order, but there’s something for everyone in that series. The heroines are the best, they’re friends, they’re all sort of outcasts from society coming together and each one has her own book where they each fall in love. It always reminds me of Smithies — that sort of female friendship where it’s all very ride-or-die girls. And I love that.
And then I would recommend Kresley Cole’s Immortals after Dark series. For me, I think Kresley is the best romance novelist of our day. I think that series is, is really, really sexy and really really smart. And the heroines in that series are – to a T – they’re the most badass heroines ever. I would start with “Pleasure of a Dark Prince.” She’s a Valkyrie and she literally has to go save the world. And he is a werewolf and he has to help her. And it’s so sexy and it’s a good example of what I was talking about how the books are political. Kresley talks about the environment and environmental issues in that book. There are issues of colonization in that book. It’s really terrific. But it’s all through this lens it’s also a love story about a Valkyrie and a werewolf.
And how about “Fire on the Ice” by Tamsen Parker? It’s a blazingly hot lesbian romance set at the Olympics between a short-track speed skater and a figure skater, and it’s fabulous!
CT: I am a Smithie and I’m an avid romance reader and I’ve really enjoyed picking up on all of the little details and Smith connections that you’ve put in your writing. Like how a lot of the dukes and aristocratic titles in your books are named after Smith residential houses. What are some of the ways in which Smith has influenced or continued to influence your career as a romance writer?
SM: Obviously, I’m deeply devoted to Smith — I wouldn’t name most of my heroes after Smith houses if I didn’t feel that way. But my relationship with Smith is almost entirely about my relationships with women at Smith and people at Smith whom I love. So anytime I write female friendship in books — and I write a lot of books that involve female friendship — it’s almost always part Smith. But there are other things too, there are definitely echoes. There’s a bench in “Wicked and the Wallflower” like the whispering bench outside of Green Street. There are lots of little easter eggs all over the books for Smithies. I don’t think I could possibly write a series that didn’t involve women being friends and supporting each other. And that’s all Smith for me.
CT: These past few months have been a troubling time for the romance writing community, as long existing issues of racism and homophobia within the RWA leadership has come bubbling to the surface. Yet given the cancellation and promised revamping of the RITAs, there’s also some glimmers of hope for a more equitable future in Romancelandia, whether that’s within the structure of RWA or outside of it. If you were to write a wish list for what you want to see in the romance writing community moving forward, what would be on that list?
SM: Every corner of America right now… the country is at a reckoning point with racism and bigotry and homophobia and ableism and fat shaming. I feel like everywhere you go, it doesn’t matter how tiny or insignificant the community is to society at large, we’re all reckoning with this. It’s time for us to clean house as a country. And that means that we have to turn the lights on everywhere. Romance has been turning the lights on and it’s doing so thanks in large part to women of color and marginalized people who are doing massive amounts of emotional work. And white cis het women and men need to stand up. If I wrote a wish list it would be one thing and it would be that white able-bodied cis heterosexual women in romance help to turn the lights on too. We need to stand for what’s been going on for our incredibly talented, incredibly hard working peers for almost fifty years. Women of color, black women especially, have been struggling in romance for years to be heard and honored and seen and lifted up. Lifting up other voices is free. So when you talk about the genre and you talk about what you want from the genre, if you are a white writer in the majority in romance: it’s time. It’s time for you to take a stand. And I think that what’s happening is a lot of us are taking a stand and there is a line in the sand and history will judge us accordingly. Every corner of our society needs to do better, but romance is not — we are not excused by any stretch of imagination just because we also happen to center women. If we are going to center women, we have to center all women.
CT: Finally, what’s the most romantic place that Smith?
SM: I liked that bench on green street a lot… I put it in a book! I don’t even know what it looks like anymore, the library, but I like that fountain by the botanical garden.
