Tuesday, May 03, 2011

What’s So Wrong with a Little Romance?

By Martha Reed

When Kate Middleton and Prince William got married last Friday, I found myself surprisingly sentimental about the whole thing. Honestly, I wasn’t expecting to feel anything. I remember sort of ignoring the big Charles and Lady Di event although my mother did get up early to go to a friend’s house to celebrate with champagne and scones at 4AM.

Being in my early twenties in 1981, I’m sure that 4AM was way too early to support my lifestyle.

But I feel different about this royal wedding. I think it’s because I’ve got another 30 years of life under my belt. I’ve come to realize just how rare and wonderful and painful human hope is. I’ve seen dreams die. Some of the deaths are long and lingering while others are sharp and cynical. I’ve gotten really good at keeping on track of my goals and ignoring the ups and downs of emotional drama that come along the way. Yes, my life is calmer now but lately I’ve been wondering if I’ve lost the ability to feel?

Now I know the answer is no, I do still feel and I know that because I thought ‘good for you’ when I saw Kate and William driving away from Buckingham Palace. I felt myself hoping that they would find some happiness together. I hope that William is man enough to stand up to the lunatic royal protocol and protect his wife the way his father Charles never did for Diana. I hope that Kate (now Catherine with a ‘C’) can keep herself grounded enough to bring joy to their lives so they don’t end up mired in lifeless royal function.

And because this wedding took my mind off of the discussion of presidential birth certificates, killer tornadoes, nuclear meltdowns and war, if even made me wonder if I should be writing romance instead?

13 comments:

Joyce said...

Although I love happily-ever-afters, I know I could not write romance. No way. I can write an occasional romantic scene, but even that's a stretch sometimes. I'd much rather be dropping bodies all over the place.

Word verification: winger. Oh sure, Blogger. Remind me the Pens are out of the playoffs.

PatRemick said...

Yay for romance, but I don't think I could write it either. Maybe erotic fiction though. Lots of money there. LOL. I'm with Joyce, there's something very satisfying about dropping bodies....

Annette said...

I like a little romance, but I need a healthy dose of murder and suspense to keep it interesting.

I didn't get up to watch the wedding, but I must say I loved Kate's dress.

Susan said...

Please, people. I write romance and I kill people all the time! LOL


It's all about doing it in such a way people don't notice the body count...until one day your editor say...Um...Susan, no. Do not kill his mother, his dad or even the cat in this one.

LOL!!!

susan

Annette said...

So true, Susan! Every mystery needs a little romance, but every romance needs a little mystery, too! And a few dead bodies.

C.L. Phillips said...

Romance makes the world go round, more often than not with girl chasing boy. In my experience, that never works. Boy must chase girl. Girl cannot be delivered at boy's doorstep (ala Princess Di and Charles). No, boy must chase girls, preferably wack back a couple of additional suitors and triumph.

Like in Outlander....love that series....

Patg said...

Romance or just relationships always makes for a better story. You don't want stick figures, but puzzle will always be mandatory.
I didn't want to watch any of the wedding live, preferred the individual parts to fast forward through.
Loved the guests, and several sites on line showed all the hats, I love hats. There is even a FB page for Beatrice's hat, made a few comments and got a few. Very funny. It was called everything from an octapus to an IUD. VF.
Patg

Ramona said...

I have heard more conspiracy theories about Andrew's daughters' hats than doubts about the moon landing! An in-your-face about Fergie not being invited? A coupla gurls having fun? And who told Pippa she could steal the show with the hottest maid-of-honor dress of all time? Yowza.

I had zero interest in the wedding, but I wake up at 4:30 a.m. anyway, so decided to take a "quick look." Ha! An evil person who shall remain nameless (Nancy Martin) had a FB thread going, and I got sucked in. Live TV and live streaming FB commentary.

I don't know about romance. I was all about the hats and dresses. Call me shallow.

Martha Reed said...

Thank you all for your comments! It's nice to know I'm not losing my grip over this thing.

Best part of all is my next 30 pages. Romance & danger is a potent combination.

Patg said...

Count me in as shallow for only being interested in the clothes.
Love the hats!!!

Jenna said...

Testing...

Jenna said...

Hey, it worked!

So... when I sent the manuscript for Mortar and Murder to my agent, she said "it's very smoochy, have you ever considered writing straight romance?"

Um... yes, I have. I started out trying to write straight romance. Would probably have gotten published too, if I'd only realized that the detailed two-page rejection letter I got from Harlequin was actually code for 'fix this and send it back to me.'

Oh, well. We live and learn.

I didn't watch the wedding, but I'm happy for them. They looked happier than Charles and Diana did back in the day. (I did watch that one. I was very young at the time and sucked in by the whole fairytale thing.) Hopefully Kate and William's relationship will turn out better.

Susan said...

I watched for the hats too!

You do realize that most of us are all about hats and dead bodies?

susan