Thursday, October 27, 2005


I got the latest Romantic Times yesterday. While perusing it, I noticed an article entitled "RT Staff Picks: Favorite Reads of 2005." This showcases the picks of the editors, CEO, publisher, and webmaster. I was surprised to notice not one of these people picked... a romance. They picked nonfiction, historical fiction, mystery (that was picked by the mystery editor-- fair enough), young adult fiction, and a thriller. But no romance or chick lit.

Well... that's kind of weird, isn't it? Out of nine staff picks, I would have expected at least one or two genre romance choices. Does this reflect the phenomenon HelenKay has noted, that when pressed to pick their "favorite books" people will almost always choose impressive-sounding books, rather than the books they really read and love the most? Or is Romantic Times really being run by people who don't love romance that much? Maybe this helps explain why they added all those other review sections and renamed themselves "Romantic Times Bookclub."


  1. Very interesting observation. I might not have noticed that when I open the magazine (I planned on buying this month's). I love blogs for finding stuff like this. Gets me thinking about different topics. Since I read about 2 non-romance books in all of 2005, I have no problem picking a romance for my favorite read of 2005.

  2. I stand by my theory that people lie about this stuff. Why, I don't know, but they do.