The Original Bodice-Ripper and the Emergence of the Romance Novel

Recently I read an article on NPR entitled Happily Ever After: 100 Swoon-Worthy Romances.  Apparently NPR had taken a poll of readers to discover what romance novels would rank in the top 100.  They had to close the poll early because the response was overwhelming.  Everybody had an opinion.

On the list was some of my favorite romance novelists, including:  Julia Quinn, Diana Gabaldon, Lisa Kleypas, Jane Austen, Charlotte Brontë, Rainbow Rowell…I could probably have written the list.  But one title was conspicuously missing:  The Flame and the Flower by Kathleen E. Woodiwiss.

TheFlameAndTheFlowerIn truth, I’d never read this book but I’m familiar with it because it is widely acknowledged as the first modern romance novel.  Published in 1972, Woodiwiss’ novel created the “historical romance” genre.  So it was with no small amount of surprise to see that this novel wasn’t included.  Why?  In a list of a hundred romance novels, how do you leave off not only the undisputed first modern romance novel, but one that was at the top of the New York Times Bestsellers list for so long?  The answer came a few days later when I read a followup article entitled, Heartbreakers: Why Some Books Didn’t Make The Final Romance List.  The article explained that this Grandmother of all Romance Novels was excluded from the list because it “no longer represents the best of the genre.”

Now I was curious.  What did that mean, exactly? I had to read the book and make my own comparisons.  What I found was a significant difference in the romance novel of 1972 versus those popular today.

  •  The Heroine:  Today’s romance novels feature strong women with no small amount of personality.  These women, though living the 19th century, can survive on their own merits if they have to.  They’re smart, opinionated and not afraid to stand up to the novel’s hero.  Not so with romance novels of old.  Woodiwiss’ heroine is meek and easily cowed.  She’s sensitive and cries easily.  As a strong woman myself, I had a hard time relating to her meekness.
  • Age Gap:  Woodiwiss’ main characters are a full 17 or more years apart in age.  In face, the heroine is only 17 at the opening of this book, while the hero is 35.  As a mom of a teenage daughter, I won’t lie — this wigged me out a little bit.
  • Rape Culture:  This would just not fly today, but it’s a major feature of this novel.  In the first few chapters, the heroine is raped by the hero.  I have to admit that I was pretty much turned off at that point and had a hard time understanding how a woman could eventually fall in love with her rapist.
  • Hattie McDaniel
    Hattie McDaniel

    Pre-Civil War Life:  The main characters live in South Carolina where there was no doubt slavery.  In today’s politically correct era, an author would tiptoe around this carefully.  Slaves would still be slaves, but somehow the heroes and heroines would think of them as equals to satisfy political correctness.  Again, not so in this novel.  The slave culture and speak reminded me of Margaret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind.  In fact, Hattie — the “Mammy” of the book could only be modeled after Hattie McDaniel’s portrayal of Mammy in the movie adaptation of Gone with the Wind.  I didn’t find it offensive, though it did make me uncomfortable as I’ve become accustomed to the more politically correct sensitives that wish to forget our ugly history.

  • Plot Themes:  The overall themes of the romance novel are still the same as introduced by Woodiwiss.  You have a  young woman who falls in love with a tyrant of a man, who’s always in a black mood.  There are no end of misunderstandings and heartbreak on both sides, until finally the two come together at the end and live happily ever after.  The only thing I found different in this regard to romance novels of today is how long it took the hero and heroine to come together.  It took forever!  Though I overall enjoyed the book, after a while I got tired of the constant misunderstandings.
  • Sexual Content:  This is one area where I’d say the romance novels of today differ greatly.  In Woodiwiss’ novel, all sexual content is vague.  You know it’s happening because the euphemisms she uses can only be related to the act of sex; but it’s not thrown in your face and obvious.  These are the romance novels that our grandmothers grew up with.  Today’s romance novels tend to be far more explicit overall, though some more so than others.  Woodiwiss leaves a lot to the imagination, while most romance novelists today spell it out in clear language.  Whether that’s good or bad is really a personal preference.  Both have something to recommend them.

All-in-all, I enjoyed The Flame and the Flower, but found it to be overly long and descriptive.  There are  parts of it that I never came to terms with, specifically how any modern woman could find a rape scene the least bit titillating; but I do acknowledge that we’ve come a long way as women in the last forty years.

The question that now begs answering is whether I would read more from this author or other authors of this era.  The answer is, “probably”; but I far prefer authors like Julia Quinn and Diana Gabaldon, whose female characters tend to be stronger, more independent, wittier, and far less sappy.

13 responses to “The Original Bodice-Ripper and the Emergence of the Romance Novel”

  1. Sheez A. Writer Avatar
    Sheez A. Writer

    Oh how lucky I am that by the time I discovered romance novels, the bodice rippers were already “gone with the wind”…tee hee.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Despite being a huge romance novel devotee, I’ve never actually read The Flame and The Flower. I tried to read it a few years back, purely so I could form my own opinions about it and so I could say I’ve read the founding romance novel. But I couldn’t get more than a few chapters into it. I think I’ve read too many excellent romance novels to accept that this book, and others I’ve read like it (i.e. early Johanna Lindsey books) are actually in the same genre as some of my most beloved romance novels. While I acknowledge the historical significance of The Flame and The Flower in the romance novel timeline, I just can’t bring myself to read it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It was an interesting read, but you’re right – there are many MUCH better out there.

      Who are some of your favorites? Any favorite titles?


      1. I love anything by Julia Quinn, Eloisa James, Lisa Kleypas, Sarah MacLean, etc. But my favorites are Romancing Mr Bridgerton, Dreaming of You, Devil in Winter, Midnight Pleasures. Well, at least my favorite historical romances. The list is never-ending!

        Liked by 1 person

      2. We could be best friends! Julia Quinn and the Bridgerton series are my all-time favorites!!! In fact, with the exception of Sarah MaxLean, I could’ve written your list! I’ve never heard of her but will check her out!!

        Liked by 1 person

      3. If you love Julia Quinn, you’ll love Sarah MacLean! Her Love By Number series is great and but I love her The Rules of Scoundrels series even more! It’s set around a gaming hall, with the most delicious heroes!

        Liked by 1 person

      4. I’m totally checking her out. JQ is the queen of the genre, IMO, but I’ve read everything she has!

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Sexual fantasies are just that–fantasies. The reason a woman might find a rape scene exciting is because it absolves the character from any wrong doing because of enjoying a sexual act. It could have escaped your notice that even today women that have sex are either regarded as whores or prudes. The rape scene lets them be ravished by a gorgeous man without having to feel guilt for being a “slut” or a “prude” for her refusal. It’s not a reflection on the woman for wanting this little escape, nor does it make her any less of a feminist. It is a response to conditioned beliefs.


    1. I didn’t mean to imply that there was anything “wrong” with someone who enjoys those fantasies. That’s really what reading is all about — escapism and chemistry. A rape fantasy is not my thing
      And I find it uncomfortable, but that’s why there are a lot of different authors within every genre. There’s a little something for everyone.

      All things considered, I enjoyed the book for what it was and the era of writing it represented.


  4. What’s wrong with age gaps 🙄


  5. Nothing at all! I love age gaps. But a 17yo dating a 35yo feels off to me. If she were 19 or 20 with that same age gap, I don’t think it would bother me as much, or maybe even at all. But 17 is still in HS. And really, the main point is that today’s romance novels rarely have more than a 10 year age gap.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: