Stacy's Place on Earth
Blog Home Change to Small Font Change to Large Font
Monday, August 07, 2006:
copycat question cuz I'm lazy....
I have all these blog ideas but no motivation to work on them...I think I'm getting internet burnout because I barely even glanced at my laptop this weekend.
Anyways, I've been thinking a lot about the first romance that I read, and how old I was when I read it. It was "Burning Obsession" by Carole Mortimer, published in 1982. I was around 11 or 12 years old when I read this book, and it opened up a brand-new exciting, and yes, confusing, world to me. It's one I've inhabited ever since.
Santuary's Finest did a post on what age is appropriate to be reading romances. Now I know that a lot of people feel that age is way too young to read romances. Heck, I think it's way to young to be reading "those kinds of books". But I did...and my mom knew I read them. I guess having her read them first let her know what I was reading and she would have stopped me if she would have felt they were too adult-oriented for someone my age and maturity level. I think it was her way of avoiding "the talk", and hey, it worked. Neither one of us had to go through that embarrassment. Thank God.
So, what are your thoughts?


  1. This is a question I have thought alot about lately. I have a 10 year old who asked me if she could read one of my books. I told her not yet. I want to keep my innocent child, innocent a little longer.

    I know kids grow up quicker today than when I was younger but I don't want to rush it.

    I want my daughters to learn about life and love from me. That way they know how it is. Romances are fantasy and although I want them to find love and have big dreams, I don't want them to get the wrong idea. When they are older and can decipher the difference between reality and fantasy then we will talk.

  2. Julie my daughter is 15 and I won't let her read my books, either. I was reading things gothics like Victoria Holt and some Harlequins but they were pretty tame although I did start reading the very sexy historicals shortly after that... too young I suppose but my mom knew as well and didn't stop me. Even though there was sex, romances always end with love as the most important factor and I think that it was more than okay for me to be reading them.

  3. Yeah, I don't think I would let mind read them until they were a little older as well. In some ways I also think it depends on the child. Different children mature and can handle different things at different ages.

  4. hey we all have our days when we can't seem to want to blog. just hang in there and soon enoughyou will get your mojo back! meanwhile just lurk and laugh at all we post lol ;-)

  5. My first was Carole Mortimer's "Only Lover" -- I was eight.

    Too young? I don't know. I do know that I loved it, and I don't think I've suffered any adverse effects (moral, mental, or otherwise) but it's so hard to tell from here. But I always knew the difference between fantasy and reality; that was never an issue for me.

    I do think it depends on the reader -- some people aren't ready to read Trixie Belden at age 8, let alone a Harlequin. Others are ready for more.

  6. Trixie Belden. OMG, Meljean, you have brought back some great memories with that one. :o)

  7. My problem is usually time rather than lack of ideas (or pictures). I'm such a perfectionist that I spend waaaaay too long writing entries or looking through my million photos. And of course it's never perfect LOL! I'm nuts (but you probably already knew that:P)

Post a Comment