Do you like your romance novels to be tightly focused, or do you prefer a wider, more complete view of the main characters and their lives?
I read a book last weekend that was passed to me by a friend of a friend. It was a romance, by an author I hadn’t read before, in a subgenre I don’t normally read. I’ve been on a fantasy/urban fantasy/steampunk kick for the last few years, with excursions into historical, paranormal and suspense. This was a contemporary romance with dashes of suspense and adventure.
My friend has high standards, so I was confident the book would be well-written. It was, but I found it enjoyable and frustrating in equal measure. The heroine and the hero were engaging, complex characters. They both had strong personalities, interesting careers, strong goals and challenging backstories. The setting was exotic and spectacular. The conflict was a little iffy, but both characters faced tough external obstacles and had to overcome some level of internal conflict in order to earn their Happy Ever After.
I like books and shows set in England/Britain; I like to travel there; I enjoy the accents when I watch the BBC; and don’t get me started on scones and clotted cream.
Naturally, one of the pages I follow on Facebook is The Royal Family. They post lots and lots of pictures that enable me to enjoy a curated fairy-tale like royal experience from a distance, without being bothered by those pesky less-than-delightful details of real-life.
Periodically I am foolish enough to read the comments people make on the pictures, usually when it is a photo of someone I don’t recognize, like the Earl and Countess of Wessex in today’s photos. They are apparently well-liked, because the comments were polite and positive, but other photos seem to bring out the worst in the commenters. Continue reading →
As I mentioned in my New TV Show Squee post back in January, I’ve been enjoying episodes of the (new to me) show The Good Placewhen I have a little downtime. In the episode I watched yesterday the head demon Michael (the Good Place architect) was complaining about humans and their fragile little bodies and ridiculous number of emotions. “You only need two,” he insisted. “Anger and confusion.”
While that can’t be right, I can’t help admitting that those two have topped the list for me more often than not for quite some time.
Possibly the last 404 days or so.
The news broadcast I generally watch when I get home from work begins each night with “it’s day xxx of the current administration,” oddly similar to the way broadcasts during the 444 days of the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979-81 began years ago. It’s hardly something to engender happy, positive thoughts, not that the news makes any attempt to do so. Consistently seeing people doing (and generally getting away with) bad things definitely leads to confusion and anger, making it a real challenge to maintain a level of positivity. Continue reading →
The all-female cast of the “Ghostbusters” reboot. From left: Leslie Jones, Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, and Kate McKinnon. (Hopper Stone/Columbia Pictures, Sony via AP, File)
Just recently I finished a fantasy story in which the protagonist was a female warrior. It didn’t really grab me. The heroine seemed to slash and burn her way through the opposition without much worry, and while consequences resulted, they were plot points rather than shifts in her character development and emotional outlook.
Guy in a skirt, I thought, and moved on.
But lately I’ve noticed that there’s been public discussion of this phenomenon—that is, the “gender swapping” effect. Continue reading →
You remember Achilles, right? He had that “heel” problem.
I read two books this past weekend (it seemed much more appealing than cleaning the garage). One was a keeper and the other probably not; one had a historical setting and the other was contemporary; but both had something in common: a realistically vulnerable hero.
First off was Lori Foster’s Under Pressure, book 1 in her Body Armour series. It was one of the freebies from the recent writing conference and, since I’d read and enjoyed her books before, I figured it would be a relaxing way to spend a Saturday afternoon.
Though I’m pretty sure I’m not the target reader for this particular series, there were a couple of elements that I thought worked really well. The first was the chemistry between the hero and heroine. It can be difficult to capture instant (or very quick) attraction between characters, but in brief brushstrokes the author did just that. The story features a resourceful heroine (Cat), a hunky bodyguard hero (Leese), and a nefarious Bad Guy threat.
Last week’s RWA Conference in Orlando was a bit unusual for me. I’ve been to writing conferences before and I’ve even heard some of these same speakers speak before, but what was different this time around is that, when the end of the conference rolled around on Saturday afternoon, I was actually a little disappointed that it was all over.
That never happens.
A number of things made this conference a little different, not the least of which was that Michille and actually I got to meet one of our blog followers live and in person. Writing here on the blog can feel pretty anonymous, so it was very exciting to have a follower recognize us and seem so pleased to meet us. We only wish we had had the presence of mind to take a photo.
My primary reason for attending this year’s conference was to spend some quality time with the rest of the Eight Ladies, and we definitely did that. Over the course of almost five days together, there was plenty of time to talk story, to brainstorm, and to plot and plan. As I had hoped, that left me re-motivated to get back to work on my current mystery draft. It was also nice to get some confirmation that the story seems to be heading in the right direction, especially since I was starting to feel like I was losing my grasp on the plot.
Looking for your weekly dose of Writing Sprints? Head on over to our Wednesday post for this week’s words and resulting stories. There’s still plenty of time to play along.
As Michille mentioned in her post yesterday, the annual RWA conference is fast approaching. In going through the proposed schedule of workshops this afternoon I was amused to see that the session about “Optimizing Writers Conferences” is being offered on Friday afternoon – more than half-way through the conference. Somehow that seems less than optimal.
Every year the conference seems to have several sessions focused on a particular theme or topic. At the first conference I went to it was “self-publishing” (that was quite a while ago). Other years have addressed forensics, the military, and crime-scene processing. The last conference I was at had a number of sessions talking about how to increase diversity in writing – both from the stand point of diverse characterizations and attracting diverse writers – a topic that is still being talked about and worked on in the writing community.
There appear to be several new topics on the schedule this year and one workshop that caught my eye was “Creating Authentic Characters with Disabilities.” Continue reading →
As I mentioned in last Wednesday’s post, work on my current manuscript that I am supposed to be buffing and polishing in preparation for pitching at RWA Nationals has been derailed by a new story idea that is refusing to patiently wait its turn in the pending idea file.
Part of the allure – other than the “fun of discovery” vs. the “hard work of wrestling a story into shape” – is that it combines two of my current passions: story and politics.
The heroine, a reporter, wants to cover the new big, shiny exciting story, but instead gets sent to the middle of nowhere to cover a political campaign that she has no interest in. She and the hero, the under-dog politician battling to unseat an entrenched incumbent, couldn’t be more different. City vs. country. Democrat vs. Republican. Vegan vs. hunter/fisherman. If I was writing a mystery, one of them would likely wind up as a chalk-outline. Fortunately, this is romance, so there will be a happily-ever-after if I have to lock them in a room until they can reach common ground. (Note to self: find room to lock characters in.) Continue reading →
How likeable do you like your main characters? Will you take strong, interesting and flawed, especially if they grow and change during the story, or do you prefer them sympathetic from the start?
And do you think readers set the bar higher for heroines than heroes?
In the recent Duke University romance forum, Ilona Andrews said that in her experience, romance readers are more forgiving of male characters than female ones. A male character can do appalling things but with the careful application of a little tragic backstory, he can still become a hero. A heroine, not so much.
That set me to wondering about one of my favorite contemporary characters, a super-rich bitch called Sasha Montgomery. She’s on ice for now, but not forgotten. She’s not a nice woman, but I love her a lot and I’d always planned to turn her into a heroine one day. Now I’m not so sure that’s a good idea.
Below is a snippet from the life of Unredeemed Sasha. She definitely has a challenging backstory. I’d be very curious to know whether you think she could be turned around.
This past Sunday, Jilly brought up a “blunder” with her recent contest entry. She’s writing a romance, but the relationship between her H&H is a slow burn. However, she got dinged by a few of the judges because there was little evidence of romance in her story (at least the first 50 or so pages) and none in her synopsis, yet this was a contest for romance writers.
I find it coincidental that Jilly got this feedback recently, because I’ve just read two books by Sarah MacLean (in her new Scandal and Scoundrel series) and one by Lenora Bell where there isn’t much evidence of romance right off the bat, either. Yet Continue reading →
You must be logged in to post a comment.