OnlineBookClub.org

The romance is not absolutely necessary but I like it when it's unexpected-there is nothing worse than an author putting two characters together just for the sake of it and building it up and building it up and 500 pages into the book they get together and the rest of the characters are surprised it happened!

Jax14 wrote:The romance is not absolutely necessary but I like it when it's unexpected-there is nothing worse than an author putting two characters together just for the sake of it and building it up and building it up and 500 pages into the book they get together and the rest of the characters are surprised it happened!

I don't mind romance, but it has to be built up for me. It can't just all of a sudden boom there together. It leaves you feeling like, "What just happened??" I don't like that. Not realistic.

kandscreeley wrote:

Jax14 wrote:The romance is not absolutely necessary but I like it when it's unexpected-there is nothing worse than an author putting two characters together just for the sake of it and building it up and building it up and 500 pages into the book they get together and the rest of the characters are surprised it happened!

I don't mind romance, but it has to be built up for me. It can't just all of a sudden boom there together. It leaves you feeling like, "What just happened??" I don't like that. Not realistic.

I think there needs to be a distinction between (a) couples that the authors wants us to believe will be together for a significant amount of time (or "forever") after the book ends, and (b) couples that simply hookup after some initial attraction. (a) would arguably need quite some build up, while (b) does not so much, right?

bobRas wrote:

kandscreeley wrote:

Jax14 wrote:The romance is not absolutely necessary but I like it when it's unexpected-there is nothing worse than an author putting two characters together just for the sake of it and building it up and building it up and 500 pages into the book they get together and the rest of the characters are surprised it happened!

I don't mind romance, but it has to be built up for me. It can't just all of a sudden boom there together. It leaves you feeling like, "What just happened??" I don't like that. Not realistic.

I think there needs to be a distinction between (a) couples that the authors wants us to believe will be together for a significant amount of time (or "forever") after the book ends, and (b) couples that simply hookup after some initial attraction. (a) would arguably need quite some build up, while (b) does not so much, right?

Yes, however, I have read books where there doesn't even seem to be attraction. The author doesn't even write in an attraction for scenario (b), and the couple is all of a sudden in the bedroom. It's just weird and awkward. For example, in Raven's Peak, if Mr. Cole had written them stopping in the middle of their road trip at a hotel just to have sex. I have seen that done even though there really was no indication of any "spark."

kandscreeley wrote:

bobRas wrote:

kandscreeley wrote:
I don't mind romance, but it has to be built up for me. It can't just all of a sudden boom there together. It leaves you feeling like, "What just happened??" I don't like that. Not realistic.

I think there needs to be a distinction between (a) couples that the authors wants us to believe will be together for a significant amount of time (or "forever") after the book ends, and (b) couples that simply hookup after some initial attraction. (a) would arguably need quite some build up, while (b) does not so much, right?

Yes, however, I have read books where there doesn't even seem to be attraction. The author doesn't even write in an attraction for scenario (b), and the couple is all of a sudden in the bedroom. It's just weird and awkward. For example, in Raven's Peak, if Mr. Cole had written them stopping in the middle of their road trip at a hotel just to have sex. I have seen that done even though there really was no indication of any "spark."

I'm not sure I understand correctly. I thought we were talking about romance and not sex? People have sex for plenty other reasons than attraction or romance or "spark", right? I mean, I agree that it would be weird and awkward for these characters in particular, but for others, I could imagine it. It depends on characterization.

I prefer no romance unless it fits well within the plot. This is hard to do. Authors too often throw in a flirtation or romance between the main characters. It sometimes takes away from the central plot, such as a mystery, thriller, or political intrigue.

bookowlie wrote:I prefer no romance unless it fits well within the plot. This is hard to do. Authors too often throw in a flirtation or romance between the main characters. It sometimes takes away from the central plot, such as a mystery, thriller, or political intrigue.

I will admit that I hate when a romance destroys the plot. I love having romance in a story but not at the expense of the plot.

I LOVE the fact that there is no romance. I think it shows integrity for the story and for the characters that there isn't a romance. It shows how strong and independent Abigail is too, or maybe just how messed up she is that she can't have a relationship haha.

I was a little surprised by this as well. While reading I kept thinking that it may happen, but it did not disappoint me when it didn't. It was nice to read a story that didn't form to the typical roles of the main male and female fall in love. With that being said I do not think it is out of the question for the other books in the series.

I'm an incurable romantic, so I love romance in my books. I's a fundamental checkpoint for me, that if theres romance involved, chances are I'll be more invested in the story. However, that being said- I have read an enjoyed books with minimal romance. This is probably the first book I've read that entertained me well enough to hold my interest without any. I guess it's possible that they could be exploring that in the next book, but I didn't really read any romantic tension at all in this book so if the future books do go that route, it'd be interesting to see how. I honestly didn't mind the lack of love between our mains and really appreciated their banter a lot more. I feel like the story is kind of heavy and romance just didn't really fit with the overall tone.

I actually do like romance in action books but only when it's done right. Sometimes, the romance in non-romantic genres can actually get overpowering and mushy and ruin the story for me but if the romance is more of a side plot and adds to the story, I like it a lot. I definitely think that if not overdone, the romance between Abigail and Haatim would be really sweet.

Adding some romance without ruining the main plot gives an extra excitement to the story. However, the book is still great without it and I think it’s unique. So for me, either way is acceptable.

normindrasarawi wrote:Adding some romance without ruining the main plot gives an extra excitement to the story. However, the book is still great without it and I think it’s unique. So for me, either way is acceptable.

Yeah, I agree. I would like to see romance develop organically and not worry too much about it just sort of popping up.

Romance can be added to the story of it is done at a realistic pace. I agree that they shouldn't be rushed into a romance. A slow, development of feelings would be nice.

I love romance in an action book! I think it just adds another dimension to the novel. As many have mentioned before, since this book is part of a series romance could be added along the way.