Archives

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #9: Contrived Endings

Oct27

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Overview of Susana’s Historical Romance Deal Breakers

  1. Reluctant Heroes
  2. Adultery
  3. Anachronistic Behavior and Historical Inaccuracies
  4. Cliffhanger Endings
  5. Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines
  6. Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants
  7. Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes
  8. Promiscuous Heroines
  9. Contrived Endings
  10. Waifs and Silly Heroines
  11. Long Separations
  12. Excessively Cruel Heroes and Heroines
  13. Breaking the Rules: Why Some Authors Get Away With It

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #9: Contrived Endings

And this means fairy godmothers (or the equivalent), surprise inheritances, hidden treasure.

I have to confess that sometimes when I plot a story, I set up a situation that is so impossible that I can’t find a way out of it.

That happened to me with the novella I am currently writing. Fortunately, I offered it up to fellow writers’ group members at our annual Brainstorming Weekend, and after about 20 minutes of intense brainstorming by 11 of us, it was obvious that what I needed to do was make a slight change in the parameters of the story. Which was quite easily done.

In real life, people did (and do) face impossible situations. And it’s quite possible that one or two did get help from relatives and friends, and maybe even discovered buried treasure in the back yard. But when these things happen in a novel, I usually feel cheated. Because I want to know that my characters either managed to extricate themselves from their difficulties, or that they had the strength of character to survive in spite of them.

For example, I read a novel once where the hero and heroine were dirt poor, since the heroine’s guardian refused to approve their marriage. They made the courageous choice to live together in poverty. So far, so good. The extent of their poverty, however, was such that it began to pull them apart. The hero was seriously considering leaving the heroine for her own good when suddenly the guardian changed his mind and released her inheritance. Suddenly everything is all rosy again. But I’m left with a feeling that this pair really doesn’t have what it takes to survive a lifetime together, and that’s just not a satisfactory HEA.

Now, I think the guardian’s change of heart might actually have worked, had the author given us some preparation ahead of time. Was he starting to regret his ultimatum? Why? And had the author not shown us clearly that this couple’s relationship was too shaky to survive even a few weeks of hardship.

In real life, these things happened to people sometimes, but for me, a proper HEA leaves me with a feeling of certainty that my hero and heroine have what it takes to survive—happily—the challenges that will face them in the future.

That may be why I’m such an obsessive fan of Diana Gabaldon’s Outlander series. Jamie and Claire live in a hazardous world and undergo one crisis after another, with barely a single serene moment in between. And yet that single moment is so deeply meaningful that it gives them the perseverance they need to survive the next catastrophe. I seriously doubt I will ever get enough of Jamie and Claire. I love them.

What do you think about HEAs dependent on lucky circumstances?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #8: Promiscuous Heroines

Oct12

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Overview of Susana’s Historical Romance Deal Breakers

  1. Reluctant Heroes
  2. Adultery
  3. Anachronistic Behavior and Historical Inaccuracies
  4. Cliffhanger Endings
  5. Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines
  6. Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants
  7. Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes
  8. Promiscuous Heroines
  9. Contrived Endings
  10. Waifs and Silly Heroines
  11. Long Separations
  12. Excessively Cruel Heroes and Heroines
  13. Breaking the Rules: Why Some Authors Get Away With It

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #8: Promiscuous Heroines

Unmarried women in historicals—especially Regencies—should be virginal, or at least the next thing to it. It’s not fair, but women who slept around were considered sluts in the early 19th century, by the upper and lower classes alike, and gently-bred young ladies were chaperoned so closely that they had little or no opportunity for sexual experimentation.

But you wouldn’t know it by the number of stories I’ve seen lately where young ladies walk out on the terrace and allow their escorts all sorts of liberties that would terrorize any gently-reared Regency innocent. Okay, perhaps a kiss is acceptable, so long as the gentleman has honorable intentions.

One book I read took place at a house party where young ladies and eligible gentlemen were crawling into each other’s bedrooms; there were adulterous liaisons, some involving ladies and male servants. No respectable Regency parent would allow his daughter to attend such a ramshackle houseparty in the first place, let alone leave her unchaperoned long enough to be despoiled by some licentious rake.

Don’t get me wrong: proper young ladies are allowed to have the normal desires and passions of youth; they simply are not allowed to indulge them until after the wedding (or close enough to it). What I mean is, to a Regency young lady, her reputation is of primary importance. Any gentleman who is interested in her must understand that she is not simply another barq of frailty who can be molested and then discarded as he sows his wild oats.

That’s one big difference between historical and contemporary romance. In a historical, the romance must be the focus. Sexual tension: yes. Sexual experimentation: not so much.

Widowed heroines should be virtuous. In other words, they do not take advantage of the freedom allowed by their widowed status to indulge in discreet affairs. At least not with anyone but the hero, and only then when their relationship has deepened into love. “Willing widows,” who have had multiple affairs before the hero comes along, tend to leave me cold.  Reeks of contemporary. Who’s to say the hero isn’t just using her like all the rest? Not romantic.

Now, I’ve seen heroines who were forced into prostitution find love and redemption with an understanding hero. A talented author can do it. The trickier part, however, is dealing with the attitudes of society with such a pairing. While Charles Fox did indeed marry his mistress, she was never accepted in society, and I’m sure many a high-stickler gave her the cut-direct when they crossed paths. Such a situation has the potential of casting doubt on the credibility of the HEA. To pretend that unpleasant scandals of the past can be completely wiped away as though they never existed is just not realistic.

In the more sensual historical romances (and erotica), as opposed to the traditional Regencies, authors can take more license with these social mores. And, as I’ve said in previous posts, there are a few authors who are skillful enough to break the rules and still leave the reader sighing contentedly. But more often than not, when I run across heroines who are allowed to sleep around without parents or chaperones noticing, I just want to throw the book against the wall.

Because if I wanted to read a contemporary romance, I wouldn’t buy a historical one. Jeesh.

What do you think? Am I expecting too much of my passionate heroines?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #7: Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes

Sep29

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Overview of Susana’s Historical Romance Deal Breakers

  1. Reluctant Heroes
  2. Adultery
  3. Anachronistic Behavior and Historical Inaccuracies
  4. Cliffhanger Endings
  5. Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines
  6. Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants
  7. Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes
  8. Promiscuous Heroines
  9. Contrived Endings
  10. Waifs and Silly Heroines
  11. Long Separations
  12. Excessively Cruel Heroes and Heroines
  13. Breaking the Rules: Why Some Authors Get Away With It

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #7: Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes

Don’t get me wrong: I like an attractive hero as much as anyone else. But I don’t really care for one who is so good-looking that serving maids drop their trays at the sight of him, and women flock to him by the dozens. Because even if the heroine is gorgeous herself, it just seems unlikely that a guy facing that much temptation everywhere he goes would be faithful to one woman forever, no matter how much he wants to. Especially if he’s never even tried to stick to one woman for any length of time. And especially in historical romances, where gentlemen aren’t really expected to be faithful to their wives.

And as much as I’d like to believe otherwise, a gorgeous hero falling for a plain-jane heroine is just not believable either. There has to be something attractive about a woman for a man like that to notice her. Perhaps he is the only one who sees it. But he’s not going to be thinking about her inner beauty during the entire story, at least not enough to prevent him from noticing all the beautiful women throwing themselves in his path.  And speaking for the plain-jane heroine, how happy an ending can it be when she has to face this sort of thing the rest of her life? A very clever author might be able to manage it, but most stories like this leave me unconvinced.

Actually, a hero doesn’t have to be more than moderately attractive, in my opinion, as long as he has the requisite heroic qualities and truly loves the heroine. Perhaps it’s because I am one of the women who does not tend to judge by outside appearance. A hero with a scar or a limp or even a few wrinkles doesn’t phase me, as long as his other qualities measure up.

Judging by the washboard chests of the heroes on the covers of most romance novels, however, I’m thinking perhaps I’m in the minority on this. But then, I was never one to buy a book based on the cover; I’d read the blurb on the back to get a hint of the plot first. Attractive covers are nice, but I always carry an image of the characters in my mind as I read, and often they don’t look at all like those some artist (who may not have even read the book) conceived.

What about you? Do you drool over heroes with ripped chests or prefer them to have more substance?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #6: Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants

Sep7

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Overview of Susana’s Historical Romance Deal Breakers

  1. Reluctant Heroes
  2. Adultery
  3. Anachronistic Behavior and Historical Inaccuracies
  4. Cliffhanger Endings
  5. Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines
  6. Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants
  7. Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroes
  8. Promiscuous Heroines
  9. Contrived Endings
  10. Waifs and Silly Heroines
  11. Long Separations
  12. Excessively Cruel Heroes and Heroines
  13. Breaking the Rules: Why Some Authors Get Away With It

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #6: Heroes With Mistresses or Who Sleep With Servants

A rake actually has great hero-potential: he’s done just about everything, sown his wild oats, and concluded that for him, women have only one use. Well, two, actually, since someday he’ll need an heir. But after awhile—although he might not admit it—there is a certain emptiness in his life that all the carousing he engages in doesn’t fill.

He’s finally ready to meet the heroine. And when he does, his life is never the same again.

If he has a mistress at the start, he has to get rid of her fairly quickly after he meets the heroine, and he can’t be sleeping with her or anyone else while he’s falling in love with the heroine. There can’t be any hint of emotional ties to the mistress either. He might not be aware of what’s happening to him, but there have to be indications right away that his attraction to other women is diminishing. And that his attraction to the heroine is growing, even though he may fight it with everything he has.

And while I know it’s very 21st century of me to object to gentlemen who sleep with servants, I find it icky when a powerful man uses an underling for sex, even if it’s consensual. Even if it happens before he meets the heroine; it’s just icky. And a proper hero cannot be icky.

It’s a bit different, however, if it happens when he’s an adolescent experimenting with his sexuality. A fully mature hero who has learned to control himself draws the line at taking advantage of his dependents.

Prostitutes and serving wenches, willing though they may be, also have a bit of an ick factor. Too much interaction on these lines—even before the heroine comes into play—makes me wonder about his chances of having contracted the French pox. It only takes one, after all.

And for that matter, I really like a hero who takes some precautions against siring bastards, no matter how primitive and unreliable the precautions might be. But if he does have any illegitimate children, he takes full responsibility for them.

A man who lives only for his own pleasure without any concern for the consequences is a sex addict. And sex addicts just do not make good heroes. Period.

What do you think? Am I expecting too much in my heroes? I’d love to know what you think.

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #5: Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines

Sep1

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #5: Unattractive or Drop-Dead Gorgeous Heroines

  • Heroines who are fat and/or described as “plain” or unattractive

Like the majority of readers, I am not the most attractive person out there. I’m middle-aged, struggle with weight issues, and use artificial means to enhance my hair and facial features. I consider myself “average.”

Also like the majority of readers, I like to fantasize about being more attractive and irresistible than I am. When I read, I’m picturing myself as the heroine; her experiences are mine, right up to the HEA at the end.

It just doesn’t do it for me when the heroine seems to have virtually *no* physical attractions. Especially when this is paired with too many psychological issues stemming from her doubts about her physical appearance. A little of this goes a long way, for me. I want the story to be about the characters falling in love. If I wanted to read a story that is more psychological drama than romance, I wouldn’t read romance.

While the heroine does not have to be drop-dead gorgeous (see below), she absolutely must have some attractive qualities. She might have mousy brown hair, but her figure should be unobjectionable and she might have the most intriguing grey eyes.  Maybe her breasts aren’t voluminous, but she has a small waist and neat ankles (whatever that is). She may be considered plain by many, but we get to see from the beginning that the hero finds some things about her attractive, which become even more appealing once he becomes better acquainted with her.

You get the drift.

Considering the growing number of books featuring fat and unattractive heroines—and the readers who seem to rave over them—I wonder if I’m in the minority here.

However, I also have a problem with:

  • Heroines who are so beautiful and sweet that everyone falls in love with them (even birds and wild animals)

I also find it difficult to identify with heroines who are too perfect. (Actually, I want to slap them silly.)

In a romance it is important to create three-dimensional characters because the characters are the story. If the main characters in your story are too good to be believed, you risk your story becoming a Disney movie, with its happy cartoon characters sailing off into the sunset. Even if you enjoy cartoons, surely you have to wonder if Cinderella and her prince really did live happily ever after without ever once clashing over raising the children or the price of glass slippers. You don’t have to be diabetic to suffer from the effects of consuming too much sugar.

A heroine can be beautiful, but she has to have some flaws too. Perhaps she perceives her nose is too long. Or she’s too tall or too short. Or her hair is too dark to be the current trend.

Her flaws can also be emotional. Perhaps she fears that people only like her because of her physical attractions. (I had a roommate like that once; I never thought she was that beautiful. Oh well.) Or she’s plagued with shyness. Or she blurts out things better left unsaid. Or she thinks she is unworthy because of her birth or social class or a past indiscretion.

I adore a good HEA. I feel cheated if I don’t get one. But I want them to seem at least somewhat realistic. I want to be convinced that my hero and heroine love each other enough—have survived enough challenges as their romance developed and matured in the story—that their relationship is strong enough to survive the uncertainties of the future.

Am I the only one who feels this way? Have you run across any five-star reads with extremely ugly or extremely attractive heroines? Do tell!

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #4: Cliffhanger Endings

Aug24

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

The fourth deal breaker is cliffhanger endings.

There’s nothing more annoying than to get to the last chapter of a book and discover that it’s not the end. That you have to buy another book to find out how your protagonists fared.

If I really care about the characters, I may buy the sequel. But I am seething inside, and any chance I will ever trust that author again is virtually gone. Even if it’s a favorite author.

If the sequel isn’t even available yet, there is no chance I will buy it. Because months later, I won’t likely care about those characters anymore.

Why do authors cheat their readers this way? If it’s meant as a technique to promote books, it’s a misguided one indeed. Nobody likes to be teased or manipulated. Eventually, readers will get disgusted and move on.

I adore a good romance series, with cameo appearances by protagonists from previous books. I love it when secondary characters from a previous book become the protagonists in the sequel. If the books aren’t spaced too far apart (i.e., I haven’t had time to forget all about them), I will buy all of them just to make sure my old friends are still doing well.

But if there’s no satisfactory HEA at the end of the book—if I discover that instead of being rewarded for their suffering, my hero and heroine have more tribulations in store for them in the next book—I’m seriously wanting my money—and my time—back.

What do you think? Are there some authors who can get away with teasing their readers with cliffhangers?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #3: Anachronistic Behavior and Historical Inaccuracies

Aug16

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

Deal breaker #3 is: anachronistic behavior and historical inaccuracies.

So many of the newer historical authors seem to be turning out what I consider contemporary stories in historical settings, and it seems as though many readers don’t care. The curvy girl on the cover wears a beautiful gown, and the novel is full of balls and handsome dukes, and if the girl sneaks out to the garden and engages in steamy sex with someone, reviewers praise it to the heavens for being “hot.” Am I the only one who questions the assumption that a gently-born young woman would be allowed to accompany a gentleman on the terrace for more than five minutes without her chaperone coming to look for her?

While I have to acknowledge that readers new to this genre may not recognize these problems, too many indications of the author’s ignorance of the time period can ruin a book for those of us who know better. And it may well be that the author doesn’t care. If all she is looking for are a few extra dollars and some temporary éclat, the ease of self-publishing can give her the platform, and her devoted friends and family can shower her work with favorable reviews until she moves on with her life.

Unfortunately, it’s not just the self-published stories that feature egregious historical inaccuracies. It seems as though the editors—if they still exist—are also unfamiliar with the time periods of the books they handle. Either that or they are so over-worked they hope the readers will be too engrossed in the story to balk at a few “minor” issues. And it’s true: I find I can ignore a problem or two in an otherwise wonderful read. However, if there are too many, or if the entire plot is dependent upon some unlikely scenario, that’s when the book ceases to be a pleasurable experience and becomes a wall-banger for me.

Here are some anachronisms and historical inaccuracies I have encountered just within the past five months in books considered historical romances (not erotica*), all involving young, innocent heroines:

  • The heroine is allowed to leave her home and walk around London without any sort of chaperone, in some cases even going to call on a single gentleman alone.
  • The heroine attends a house party hosted by a gentleman known for his scandalous house parties—which is enough in itself to ruin her reputation—but she is so loosely chaperoned that she and her lover can easily sneak into each other’s rooms at night.
  • In a medieval, the hero and heroine cannot marry because their siblings are married to each other, which by church law makes them siblings as well. So they run off and pretend to be married. Really? While our 21st century wisdom tells us this law is ridiculous, these characters lived with medieval cultural and religious mores; the guilt over time would eventually take its toll, even if their deception were never uncovered. NOT a satisfactory HEA.
  • The heroine attends a ball and inadvertently has sex with a stranger in a library so dark they cannot see each other’s faces.
  • The heroine’s father wants her to marry an old lecher and tells her to allow him whatever liberties he wants.
  • The heroine is allowed to remain alone in the family home with no supervision.
  • The heroine is allowed to host her brother’s scandalous house parties.
  • The heroine goes shopping for a gown to wear at a ball that very evening. (I suppose she dropped in at Harrod’s to look through the dresses on the rack?)
  • Waffles are served for breakfast.
  • The heroine is allowed to entertain gentleman callers and ride in a closed carriage with a gentleman with no supervision.
  • The hero is a male prostitute in a brothel where aristocrats bring their daughters to be “breached” prior to the wedding night. (!!!)
  • The author doesn’t understand British titles and refers to a young girl as Lady Davenport instead of Lady Camilla. (HINT: before writing a historical novel set in England, read up on the proper use of titles. It’s really not something you can just guess at.)
  • An illegitimate son is the heir to his legitimate half-brother’s title and estate.
  • A man is allowed to marry his father’s or brother’s widow, or a woman is allowed to marry her deceased sister’s widower.

What anachronisms and historical inaccuracies make a book a wall-banger for you?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #2: Adultery

Aug13

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

The second one is adultery involving the hero or heroine.

I’ve seen scenarios where the non-hero husband is cruel and abusive, even threatening to kill the heroine (especially in medievals), but I don’t find that a good enough excuse for adultery. I wouldn’t tell a 21st century abused woman that she either has to go back to her husband or go to a nunnery (perhaps the closest thing to a medieval equivalent of a shelter for battered women), but in medieval times there weren’t many other options. In one story I read recently, the abused wife ran away to a distant town with her lover and they pretended to be married. But the guilt of their deceit had already started to tarnish their relationship before the book’s conclusion, leaving the reader with a very unsatisfactory HEA. (In fact, the story was set up in such a way as to make a satisfactory HEA impossible.) I know this isn’t fair by 21st century standards, but you really should not write a novel set in medieval times and then proceed to ignore the social and religious mores of the time. Less knowledgeable readers might not notice, but those of us who have read widely in the genre will recognize an amateur when we see it. [Historical inaccuracy, another deal breaker, will be discussed in a later post.]

What about a spouse who is ill, disabled, or confined to a mental institution? Or a spouse who has run off with another person and disappeared? While I do not expect a hero to remain celibate forever under these circumstances, I cannot like the heroine to be his mistress. Remember Jane Eyre? She knew she couldn’t have a proper HEA with Edward while his wife was living, even if she was a lunatic. I mean, how can you justify stigmatizing your children with the label “bastard”? Somehow, the HEA has to include a legal marriage, and I can’t believe a heroine who starts out as a mistress can have that much confidence that her husband/protector won’t eventually deceive her as well.

Oh, and the plots where the sterile husband invites his best friend to impregnate his wife? NO! Forget it! It doesn’t matter if the husband is good or evil, the whole adultery/deception angle opens up a Pandora’s box of guilt and fear that always manages to tarnish the HEA in some way.

What about you? Do find adultery in a historical romance acceptable in some situations?

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.

Historical Romance Deal Breaker #1: Reluctant Heroes

Aug10

Literally decades of reading historical romances have led me to develop strong opinions of what defines a truly satisfying story, so the other day I set about making a list of characteristics that turn a potential five-star read into a one- or two-star. Admittedly, there are some skillful authors who manage to successfully incorporate one or more of these scenarios in their books; however, I have run across quite a few more who in my opinion haven’t quite managed it.

These are what I call “deal breakers”—characteristics that make a book a wall-banger instead of a pleasurable diversion. Not surprisingly, many involve character, particularly, the character of the hero and heroine. They have to be likable. They have to be three-dimensional, i.e., well-drawn-out characters with flaws, not fairy princesses. And they have to be able to fall in love, convincingly, the head-over-heels kind of love.

The first deal breaker for me is the reluctant hero.

Nothing is guaranteed to turn me off a book so much as a hero who denies his feelings until the very last chapter. Certainly some initial reluctance is expected; what Regency buck is eager to tie himself down to a leg-shackle before he has sown his wild oats? But the attraction needs to happen fairly soon after he meets the heroine; there must be indications early on that he enjoys her presence, resents it when other men pay her attention, etc. Which doesn’t mean that love at first sight is de rigueur. Instant attractions can be quite wonderful, but ultimately, the feelings between them must be based on something other than physical characteristics.

Below are some examples of reluctant heroes I have encountered recently:

  • The hero was so in love with his deceased wife that he cannot imagine ever risking his heart again, so when he starts falling for the heroine (poor thing), he determines to marry another young lady he doesn’t care as much for instead. Heroes cannot be idiots.
  • The hero recognizes his soulmate, but continually spurns her because childhood traumas make him feel unworthy. Heroes cannot be whiners.
  • The hero is damaged from his experiences in the war, but not too much to fall into bed with his deceased best friend’s sister. When events come to the point where her reputation will be ruined, he refuses point-blank to marry her. Heroes cannot use the heroine and then abandon her.
  • The hero is a notorious rake who has determined never to marry, and when faced with the love of his life, he runs away with another woman, forcing her to marry another man, who abuses her cruelly. Heroes cannot be jerks.
  • The hero and the heroine share a kiss in a moonlit garden and arrange several more meetings. When the heroine, who is being pressured to marry a wealthy old man, begs the hero to marry her, he confesses that he is already married (how could he forget?), and abandons her to a miserable marriage. Heroes cannot be cowardly or adulterers.

Of course, the above cases are extreme; many times the reluctant hero is simply. . . reluctant. Not mean or cruel or particularly stupid. . . just there. While he may not get my dander up, he’s also. . . boring. And frankly, heroes cannot be boring either.

What do you think? Can you add some examples of reluctant heroes that you have encountered lately? Or can you think of stories where an initially reluctant hero successfully makes the transition into delightfully besotted hero? I’d love to hear about them!

*Disclaimer: This series of “deal-breakers” is meant to refer to books labeled historical romances, and not to erotica, which is a completely separate sub-genre and has an entirely different purpose.