Valerie’s first successes came with non-fiction titles that covered topics ranging from history to homemaking, but it was her own desire to create the romance novel she wanted to read that led her down the path of love.

‘I had read so much romance, and I had my favourites, but I’d always get to a certain point and I’d think, this is what I think should happen next, so that’s what I did.’

‘And I think that’s common to many romance writers. Every one has a different take on the same theme, and each of us gives the stories their own flavour, I guess. We take the conventions of the genre and give it a unique twist or interpretation. That’s what publishers want. And that’s what readers want too. And that’s how I got into it, really.’ ‘Of course the absolute fundamental for a romance writer is that you must believe in romance. You cannot write it tongue-in- cheek.’

‘Next come the core elements of a man, a woman and a conflict. In addition to these there is the happy ending, which is a kind of understanding you have with your readers. There are a lot of ways that endings can be satisfying, and they don’t all end in marriage.’

The happy ending, or the HEA (Happily Ever After), as it is referred to by many bloggers, is one of the most criticised features of the romance genre. But, according to Valerie, those critics are entirely missing the point.

‘We’re not dealing with real life here. Sure we have a semblance of real life or ‘verisimilitude’ if you like; something that appears plausible (and the romance has to be totally believable) but is still fantasy,’ she says.

‘The genre guidelines provide a starting point. My first question when I sit down to write is always: who are these people, what attracts them to each other, what is keeping them apart, and why? I love the why. It’s the engine of fiction.’

‘It basically comes down to characters’ goals, their motivations, and the conflict between them. Conflict is not just the domain of romance; in fact without conflict you don’t have any kind of story. Some of the new writers think that conflict is just a matter of having their characters arguing all the time. But it is a lot more than that. That just makes for a book you want to throw against a wall.’ ‘The most important thing is that the characters have to change or grow. If that doesn’t occur it’s not satisfying and the book hasn’t achieved anything,’ she says.

Valerie has little respect for what she calls ‘some of the modern literary conventions’.

‘These books where you either leave everything entirely up in the air and unresolved, or you kill off everyone in the story you’ve ever loved. Where’s the satisfaction in that?’

One thing that characterises the romance genre is the tension between the lovers. In many cases the heroine spends most of the story refusing the attentions of the hero, while we, the readers, know from very early on that it is going to happen. This predictability is another source of criticism, but to Valerie it’s all part of the game.

‘To me it’s like a children’s pantomime where the main character is at the front of the stage talking to the audience and saying to the kiddies ‘Let me know if the villain’s coming’. And then the villain appears from back stage and tip toes across in the background and all the kids’ yell, ‘Here he comes, here he comes!’ The audience knows the villain and the hero are going to come to blows, but the hero doesn’t know. And this is the same kind of pact that we have with our readers. We all know the hero and heroine will get together, but how?’ she says.

So why all the crticism and defence of the genre?

‘My suspicion is that it is criticised because it’s a female genre written by women for women. One of the kisses of death on a movie for example is if it’s labelled a chick flick. Yet if it’s written by a man it’s wonderful. It’s society’s judgement. Female areas are undervalued: from employment and the arts to sport.’

‘One of the feminist arguments I find interesting is whether the heroine, so-called, is actually the hero. It’s her journey, her growth, her quest, if you will. It’s an inversion, and in that way it is empowering. She’s the one who tames the beast.’

‘When I was working with Jennifer Byrne while she was Publisher at Reed Books, she asked me why women in romances are always attracted to such bastards. The answer is simple: winning against a wimp is no triumph, taming a tiger is much more satisfying.’