i recently read Don't Want You Like a Best Friend and I think it could be categorized as a wallpaper romance, which I'd never heard of before this essay. It's queer, which is not the real "wallpaper" aspect, but while reading I felt like the behaviors and opinions of the characters were soooo 2024. I enjoyed the book, but it really felt like it was only historical because that's a popular trend right now. This book could easily have taken place in any other time period if the author just switched a few settings.
I’m glad you alluded to the Tiffany problem - maybe we should call it the Wollstonecraft or Lamb problem when it comes to social mores?
There’s also the wallpaper issue when people write books set in the present day but in a place they don’t live - I think most British readers have experienced reading a book purportedly set in the UK but which just doesn’t FEEL right, and it turns out to have been written by a North American author. This stuff is tricky, and as you say, if I enjoy the story, I’m willing to forgive a lot.
I went to an event with author Lex Croucher last year and they described their books as ‘fantasy historical’, I.e. a fantasy of history. I liked that!
Lots to think about here! Wallpapering is a good term because it is not always bad to have wallpaper in the room, but if the room is only decorated with wallpaper and nothing else, then the room will feel empty. I think historical settings work best when the story engages with the era in some way or another, and so wallpaper stories feel empty to me when they are only mimicking world-building done by other books in the genre and don't leverage the setting themselves for plot, commentary, or other narrative purposes.
i recently read Don't Want You Like a Best Friend and I think it could be categorized as a wallpaper romance, which I'd never heard of before this essay. It's queer, which is not the real "wallpaper" aspect, but while reading I felt like the behaviors and opinions of the characters were soooo 2024. I enjoyed the book, but it really felt like it was only historical because that's a popular trend right now. This book could easily have taken place in any other time period if the author just switched a few settings.
I’m glad you alluded to the Tiffany problem - maybe we should call it the Wollstonecraft or Lamb problem when it comes to social mores?
There’s also the wallpaper issue when people write books set in the present day but in a place they don’t live - I think most British readers have experienced reading a book purportedly set in the UK but which just doesn’t FEEL right, and it turns out to have been written by a North American author. This stuff is tricky, and as you say, if I enjoy the story, I’m willing to forgive a lot.
I went to an event with author Lex Croucher last year and they described their books as ‘fantasy historical’, I.e. a fantasy of history. I liked that!
Lots to think about here! Wallpapering is a good term because it is not always bad to have wallpaper in the room, but if the room is only decorated with wallpaper and nothing else, then the room will feel empty. I think historical settings work best when the story engages with the era in some way or another, and so wallpaper stories feel empty to me when they are only mimicking world-building done by other books in the genre and don't leverage the setting themselves for plot, commentary, or other narrative purposes.
Great analysis. I can't define wallpaper, but I know it when I read it.