U.S.Government Supports Romance

For Love … And Money

We all know that writers have a hard time making any money at their craft.  Unless you are one of the few at the very top, making a living through fiction writing is difficult – unless you lower your standard of living.  Can’t do that?  Then don’t give up your day job. 

One of the items circulating the Internet lately says that the City of Philadelphia now requires all bloggers to purchase a business privilege license for $300.  Whoa.  Three hundred bucks to be allowed to blog?  And that is a “privilege” license? 

Actually, that information is not quite right. Philadelphia requires that those making money on their blog have a license. The $300 is for a lifetime license, or you could pay $50 for one year.

Still, it is a tax to blog, more or less.

But the federal government is more generous to writers.

 In some ways.

If you write romance.

In Wastebook 2013, by U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, one of the senator tom colburnitems he discusses is the Popular Romance Project.  In fiscal year 2013, the project received approximately $914,000. The purpose of the program is to “explore the fascinating, often contradictory origins and influences of popular romance as told in novels, films, comics, advice books, songs, and internet fan fiction, taking a global perspective—while looking back across time as far as the ancient Greeks.”

Wow!  An ambitious project, and certainly one that would need nearly a million bucks of taxpayers’ money.

It aims to  “bring new audiences into the conversation about the nature of love, romance, and their expression in novels and popular culture more broadly” through four programs:

   A documentary entitled “Love Between the Covers”;

   An interactive website dedicated to romance and romance novels;

   An academic symposium on “the past and future of the romance novel” hosted by the Library of Congress Center for the Book; and

   A “nationwide series of library programs dealing with the past, present, and future of the romance novel” with a traveling exhibit.

 I can see that they may need more money.

 Here’s a few of the website topics included:

   Team Edwteam edwardard or Team Jacob?

 “Are heroes like Edward romantic or controlling?” ponders the Popular Romance Project website, referring to the vampire character in the Twilight.

    Call Me Maybe:

The Popular Romance Project website celebrates Carly Rae Jepsen’s hit song “Call Me Maybe” as a “fun, flirty invitation to a dreamy crush” and examines how the song’s video has provokes some “very interesting conversations about contemporary romance.”

   The Spy Who Loved Me:                                               .      the spy who loved me .

The romance of British Secret Service Agent James Bond, 007, is examined by the Popular Romance Project website, noting that “the recurrent death of romance is fundamental to the 007 franchise. What can popular romance scholars make of this motif?

 Given that this industry generated over $1.4 Billion in 2012, and remains as hot as ever, is this really the way to spend our tax money? 

 I write mystery and suspense books.

 Now, if the money were spent on the mystery and suspense area, well, then …

 

Any comments?  Is this a terrible waste of taxes – or …

And you can see what I write (not on a government site or supported by tax dollars) at:  http://amzn.to/1eeykvG

 

 

8 thoughts on “U.S.Government Supports Romance

  1. I used to work at a library. In the fiction genres, more romance books were checked out than any other category, at least at this library. And this needs to be studied? hahahahaha I just can’t believe it. Just survey some readers and let it go. And, like you, I hope their preference is mysteries. Excellent post! (And she walks away shaking her head and mumbling about studies.)

    • I think we all have the same experience. Romance is big. I mean, romance books are big. Why subsidize them? I used to wonder about our congress. Now, as you said, I just shake my head. Thanks for stopping by, Marja,, and the nice comment.

    • I’m against the move. But maybe we can find some more astute people to vote into office. Well, I won’t get started on politics. Just say, thanks Elaine, for the good comment. jim

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.