I think Persuasion is the most romantic book ever.

Yes, Persuasion is one of my favorites too.

Persuasion is the best - my very favorite Austen and one of my favorites of all-time.

I think Persuasion is the best romance but Pride and Prejudice it the funniest.

I just read and loved Mary Balogh's "Web of Love." Jennifer Crusie's "Bet Me" is also good. I need to read some Julia Quinn!

Jennifer Crusie has couples over the age of 30, snappy dialogue and lots and lots of dogs in her romances, what more could a person want?

Also if you want some Navy Seal action with your romance, Suzanne Brockmann will fit the bill.

Julia Quinn's historicals (find her Bridgerton family books) are great "gateway" romances-- she's got witty dialog and believable characters. I also really suggest Loretta Chase (Lord of Scoundrels or Miss Wonderful) are also good "gateway" romance novels. A friend suggested Jennifer Ashley's The Madness of Lord Ian Mckenzie to me and I blew through it last weekend-- the heroine is a widow, the hero has what seems to be high-functioning Asperger's, and it's set later in the 19th century (there's bustles and trains mentioned) than most historicals I read. I loved the very non-traditional twists on the main characters, and I thought the hero's experience with Asperger's was well-written. Laura Kinsale does wonderful historical romances, but damn, they're usually pretty intense.

For contemporaries, I loved Lisa Kleypas' contemporaries (a trilogy about a Texas oil family, start with Smooth-Talking Stranger and watch out for the domestic violence in Blue-Eyed Stranger), and Jennifer Crusie is always a good bet. I also liked Victoria Dahl's contemporaries set in Colorado. To stretch it a bit into YA, Megan McCafferty's Sloppy Firsts/Jessica Darling series is great, very funny and a five-book series about Jessica Darling and her on-again-off-again relationship with her boyfriend/not-boyfriend. Nora Roberts, while very much a cliche, writes some good romances-- I'm working through Montana Sky and I can see why she's one of the most-purchased authors in history. She's also active in the romance community and quick to call out less-desirable aspects of it (the 80s rape-tacular romances, the insistence that every heroine be a virgin whose magic hoo-ha is the only cure for the hero's wandering mighty wang).

I second the suggestion to hit up Smart Bitches, and, if you want a good and irreverent overview of romances, they have a book called Beyond Heaving Bosoms that's available through SPL. When I can't find something to read, I hit their A reviews and work my way through: http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/categories/category/reviews_by_grade_a/

Out of the pink ghetto, Jane Austen and High Fidelity are great romances. Remember, basically any book in which two people meet and fall in love can be called a romance, it just depends on how much of the story it takes up.

Thanks for these recommendations. I know that "good" is too vague an adjective there. I should have stated the question more clearly. I'm looking for romance novels with strong writing (although I suppose "strong" is up for grabs too), novels that would be enjoyable to read by people who pick up "literary" fiction (i.e. if it didn't have a gilded, cleavage-y cover, and instead had a sleek modern one, and people picked it up, would it satisfy?), novels that play with the edges and the expectations of the genre.

I also like tough smart lady protagonists. No unnecessary fainting.

AMEN!

The movie was ok, but I hated the book. One of my least favorite books of all time.

oh, and "Birdsong" by Sebastian Faulks is also a really well done romantic novel.

I know, I felt queasy about writing "transcend" there - I tried to mitigate it by writing about books that both honor and transcend their genres. Books that most deeply embody their genres? Can books embody things?

I mean, there are books in underrated genres that are written to be quick reads, not deeply cherished and loved books caressed forever and placed at eye level on the bookshelf. You know? That doesn't mean the genre sucks - it just means that some books are written to not be that way. And others are magnificent books that happen to be a particular genre. Not that they're snobbier than the other books (or more "literary", whatever that means), but they are simply beautiful examples of the possibilities of a genre.

I'll check out that Le Guin essay - it sounds great.

..and I didn't mean to preach - I just find it an interesting dynamic which I see all sides of at the library - readers who are genre ashamed and genre proud. Personally some of my favorite authors are those who combine some highly original voice or outlook with that healthy respect for a well-told story - even authors who are able to write books that seem compelling without that much plot at all...

Yeah, I couldn't ever get into that place with talking about books where I was supposed to get so enlightened that I was like "above" plot or narrative. Stories are important! Stories keep cultures alive! Stories help people understand who they are! Stories help those of us with really difficult day jobs disappear into someone else's life for a few hours at night, which is an incredibly valuable service!

But yes, there are some books that have a healthy respect for story without much "happening." The best example I can think of is Marilynne Robinson's Gilead.

I think it would be really fun to be on the other side of the desk and see who's really unabashed about their particular genre love and who hides them under their fancier books and goes to the self-check-out (ahem, me). I even sometimes won't put something on hold because I'm convinced that the librarians notice whose names are attached to which holds, and try to make little stories about what kind of people we are based on those holds, and sometimes I don't want to wreck my (obviously, wholly imaginary) reputation.

Amen to all you say about stories: you're singing my tune. Don't worry about librarians snickering about what you check out - most of us pride ourselves to a sort of obnoxious degree about not snooping or being judgemental, to the point where someone who uses the term 'trashy books' in a gathering of librarians is likely to get shushed with a vengeance. Anyway, here in Seattle one always presumes that you're reading any given book 'ironically,' or maybe even 'post-ironically.' (-:

"I wonder if female authors shy away from writing straight-up love stories because they're afraid of the romance-novel label?"

That's not true at all. There were over 9000 romance books written last year. There are over 10,000 authors registered with the Romance Writers of America, and over 1500 who write novel-length books. Romance is the largest genre of fiction in the US.

Also, do you consider romance writers in a different class than, or separate from female literary authors? And how do you differentiate? The amount of skin shown on the (sometimes completely absurd) book covers?

I think it would be really interesting to see you review several romance titles.
(Don't mean to be snarky at all here, but it really burns me up that the romance genres get so maligned by reviewers, literary authors, etc.)

I think the "literary" fiction thing is really tricky. I gave up on it as a useful descriptor after the Franzen/Oprah dust-up - it became clear in that conversation that literariness was really just a signifier of a particular kind of snottiness, entitlement and overall douchey-ness.

I should have been more clear in my original question...I was thinking about how I used to look at the massive rows of paperback mysteries in my local used bookstore, and they all looked just alike, and I kind of figured that they were all just alike on the inside. But then my dad told me to read some Tony Hillerman, which I loved. (I love that his books do sort of what this new era of TV dramas do - develop characters over time, rather than being limited by one discrete episode. People die, there's grieving and resting and coming back and getting to know a character over the course of 4 or 5 books instead of one. Walter Mosely is another one who is hiding in the mystery section but is very talented with this long-form technique.) But if you don't know how to look, the Hillerman novels look just like all the other mystery novels. Or like the Carl Hiassen paperbacks are sold in the airport bookstores alongside the crap airplane books but are actually very funny and cutting and smart. I was wondering if there was anyone buried in the romance novel section of the used bookstore that's like that - mass marketed gems. From the answers to this question, I gather Georgette Heyer is the best of those.

I remember reading about One Day - I need to put it back on my list. I don't particularly enjoy reading Nick Hornby (his cynicism interferes with his writing, I think, and he sucks at writing women characters). Isn't It Romantic looks great, too, and I LOVE that he describes as "an entertainment"!