I don’t know where the reviews (from which Andrew drew his conclusions) are drawing the distinctions, but at this point in romance genre development (where Baker/Ashley, Novak, and Feehan are deeply ensconced), “genre norm” covers everything from inspirational romance with barely a kiss to erotic romance. In other words, there is no genre norm. And I personally believe that most women who write sex don’t do it TO arouse; they write it to explore the characters’ journey to love and/or confirmation/consummation of that love. Arousal (if it happens) is a side effect.

(I look at it like a variation on a theme of men using love to get sex and women using sex to get love.)

That said:

I’m not sure a line can be drawn between graphic depiction and intent to arouse because each reader brings his/her own, ah, “baggage” to the work and for me, Random Reader, my response is dependent on A) what’s going on in my life (e.g., stress/money/screeching children/the sound of a cat yakking on the carpet) and B) what’s going on in my hormone fluctuations.

What might trip my trigger one day will make me yawn the next or on a different day, I might skip over it entirely. For instance, I read an erotic romance whose philosophical content was so intriguing, the erotic content irritated me to no end because it got in the way of the far more intriguing concepts. I also know that if I’d read that two weeks later, it’s likely I’d have had a different response entirely.

With regard to something like Twilight, wherein there was no graphic terminology/depiction, but the arousal factor was high–I think that was brilliant and, in fact, I’m taking my cue from Meyer as to the touchless/kissless seduction. (Jury’s still out as to whether she MEANT to do that, a la Pee Wee Herman.)

In this specific instance and context, I’m talking about graphic depiction without regard to arousal (or not).

Um, I’m not clear on the distinctions here. Are we talking about graphic terminology or success in causing arousal or something else entirely?

Brenda Novak, and Amanda Ashley (aka Madeline Baker). All [two] are known for romance books in which the erotic content is relatively tame and even chaste.

Methinks you haven’t read these writers, because I can assure you…it ain’t chaste.

Good work Andrew.

Fascinating, as always.