Just the other day someone said to me, “I would never read a romance.†Yeah yeah, we’ve all heard it before, and it enraged me as usual, and I briefly considered telling this otherwise intelligent, talented man that I would bet folding money he had read Jane Eyre, if not some Jane Austen, in college…but then I didn’t.
Because I got to thinking about what I won’t read.
At first, I was all, “I would never say that! I would never prejudge an entire genre! I will read anything, I tell you! Anything!†And then I realized that’s not really true.
I’m not a terribly girly girl – I like makeup and shoes (shoes! swoon) and I hate bugs, but I’m definitely not all ruffles and pink glitter and flirtinis. Yet ever since I was a kid, I’ve read primarily about girls and women. And, most of the time anyway, books written by women. Loved Little Women, had no interest in Jo’s Boys. Gobbled up every Nancy Drew I could find, never cracked the spine of a Hardy Boys mystery. I’ve reread A Little Princess and The Secret Garden dozens of times, but I’ve never even picked up Little Lord Fauntleroy. An English teacher had to twist my arm to get me to read Huckleberry Finn.
The most interesting aspects of history for me are always its effect on women’s lives. I can tell you lots about suffrage and about pregnancy and child rearing through the years, but I can’t tell you anything about wars outside of basic dates, and I don’t know much about military heroes or the design of ships or muskets. My favorite Civil War stories are always about female spies, and when it comes to the Revolutionary War period, my interest is in Betsy Ross, not George Washington.
Most of the books on my shelves are written by women. Nora Roberts, Julia Quinn, Patricia Gaffney, Elizabeth George, Deborah Crombie, Jodi Picoult, Diana Gabaldon, Edith Wharton, Charlotte Bronte, Jane Austen, Shirley Jackson…Yes, yes, I know, you’re getting the idea. The number of books I own written by men is pretty damn small in comparison, and a lot of those are written by Stephen King (of whom I am an unashamed fan).
As usual, though, there’s a big exception. When it comes to romance, I usually read for the heroes. Don’t get me wrong – I want a heroine I can relate to, but the pull for me is the hero, and I’ve realized he’s usually either dark or tortured in some way. Patricia Gaffney’s Sebastien Verlaine, of To Have and to Hold. Jamie Fraser, of Diana Gabaldon’s fantastic Outlander series. Anne Stuart’s oh-so-tortured Bastian Touissant in Black Ice. Michael and Gabriel of Robin Schone’s The Lover and Gabriel’s Woman.
Once I started thinking about it, I realized that most of the characters which have fascinated me on TV are dark male characters, too. Angel and Spike from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Mulder of The X-Files, Jack, Sawyer, and Sayid on Lost. The incredibly conflicted (and very, very hot) Logan and Weevil on Veronica Mars.
Both Veronica and Buffy have major issues (or, as some would say, subscriptions) to struggle with, which is why I love them both so much. There’s still nothing like a strong female character for me. But I can’t think of a lot of other women, especially in romance, who are as dark as the men I’ve mentioned. There just aren’t a lot of women in romance – or on TV, actually – who are tortured, or who need redemption.
Why is that? Seems like a pretty big hole in the plot continuum to me, and one that smacks of something upsetting. Is it just not “seemly†for a woman to have a dark past? Would it be too much to ask that readers sympathize with a woman trying to overcome alcoholism, or addiction, or suspect moral choices? And those are only some of the reasons heroes seek redemption, aren’t they?
Dark or tormented heroines tend to be victims. Women overcoming abuse, for instance. Judith from Karen Ranney’s gorgeous A Promise of Love is a great example. Even women like Ana Lucia and Kate on Lost are given very sympathetic reasons for their transgressions. Ana Lucia, a former cop, shot someone who had caused her to lose her baby. Kate killed the stepfather who had been abusing her mother. And that doesn’t bother me, except when those are the only kinds of reasons women are given for seeking redemption or change.
Maybe it’s easier to paint men this way – Alison Kent’s fabulous SG-5 series features heroes who have gritty, uncomfortable pasts, such as the military. Of course, women aren’t eligible for combat. And in thrillers, all of the women spies I’ve encountered are villains.
Maybe I’m weird – I love a good comedic romp once in a while, and I’ve read plenty of family dramas, which I enjoy, too. But my natural love of strong female heroines – whether they’re mystery-solving teens or contemporary women facing divorce or governesses dealing with brooding employers – ranks just above a story about someone who needs to battle his or her demons and make peace with their past. Just happens that sort of story is usually given to a man.
Am I wrong? Are dark or tormented heroines out there and I’m missing them? And is there anything you won’t read on principle?
No related posts.
>
I won’t support (by buying) anything that perpetuates bigotry, hatred, or intolerance.
Other than that, I’ll read anything.
The tortured heroine is out there, we just have to look a little bit harder. Shiloh Walker has them in her books, especially the Hunter series. Right now my favorite tortured heroine is one that’s been in several Hunter stories – her name is Liandra – and she’s determined to face the world alone. Liandra’s journey isn’t over yet, yet I see a lot of Kendra (from BtVS) in her – tough, independent, stubborn and determined to do it on her own.
And I also consider Eve Dallas from JD Robb’s “In Death” series to be a tortured heroine, literally and figuratively. Oh sure, she has Roarke, but finding the love of her life doesn’t mean the nightmares have stopped. As time has gone by, she’s learning more an more about her past, and it’s not always an easy thing to remember.
It’s fascinating to see female characters like this because we are so used to the tortured “hero”. I would love to see more heroines like this. Interesting topic Amy
Oh, as to what I won’t read, Alessia covered it very well. Sadly there are too many of those elements in the real world – we don’t need them in our books too.
I read an e-press book recently, Tracy Sharp’s Repo Chick Blues, and she wrote about a tortured heroine and a (not-so-tortured) hero. Pretty good.
One thing I notice is that you are more likely to get a tortured hero AND heroine in the same book then you are to get a tortured heroine and not-so-tortured hero together.
Especially in paras and romantic suspense.
Alessia, you said it better and more succinctly then I could have. Brava!
And I also consider Eve Dallas from JD Robb’s “In Death†series to be a tortured heroine, literally and figuratively.
I forgot about her — I only read the first two books because I’ve been kind of “saving” the series for a rainy day. Good call!
One thing I notice is that you are more likely to get a tortured hero AND heroine in the same book then you are to get a tortured heroine and not-so-tortured hero together.
Interesting. It might be easier to write an overall darker book than balance dark/light, I guess.
I love tortured heroes and tortured heroines. But it’s much more difficult to find tortured heroines (and they’re often painted as victims rather than true tortured characters). But there have been a few. Paula Detmer Riggs has written several of these, especially Taming the Night. The heroine was a victim, but she was also a drug addict – and she’s paired with a fairly normal hero (who has a prejudice against recovering addicts, naturally). I was terribly disappointed when Riggs finally wrote the sequel to this book, and it was awful. Another tortured heroine I enjoyed was in Almost Perfect by Patricia Rice – I really liked the flawed heroine but this was definitely a book that people either loved or hated. And the heroine is paired up with a pretty normal guy in this one, too.
I think many readers judge tortured heroines more harshly than tortured heroes – heroes can treat the heroine like dirt and still be “redeemed”, but a heroine is only allowed to be “bad” in very limited ways.
Another tortured heroine I enjoyed was in Almost Perfect by Patricia Rice – I really liked the flawed heroine but this was definitely a book that people either loved or hated.
I just looked it up on Amazon — great recommendation! Thanks, Karen!
I LOVE tortured heroes AND heroines.
I think Karen hit the nail on the head with what she said about reedemable heroines, but I’d like to see more dark heroines–so I’m writing them. We’ll see how they go over with readers.
Not to be prejudiced but no matter the genre I tend to buy & read woman authors. I understand and enjoy their point of view much better, not always all action but some introspection.
I love the tortured or heroine who grows and learns so I even enjoy young adult fiction like Tamora Pierce.
I won’t read true-crime inspired novels or anything in the serial-killer realm – stuff like “Hannibal” – because it grosses me out and has me sleeping with the lights on for days. Thing is, the difference between Amy’s “I don’t read” and my “I won’t read” and her friend’s proclaimation is that he’s attached judgment to it. I don’t read serial killer books because they scare me, not because I think they are beneath me. Sadly, I think a lot of people won’t read romance because they (wrongly) assume they are above such dribble. There’s nothing wrong with preferring a certain genre over another (I’m also not a big fan of mysteries) as long as those genres not chosen aren’t dissed in the process.
I’m a huge fan of dark, tortured heroes, and Amy’s list above nearly exactly mirrors my thoughts. And I agree that it seems most tortured heroines are tortured due to being victimized as opposed to acts they themselves committed for borderline reasons. Perhaps this phenomenon is a close cousin to the virgin/whore dichotomy, where females who have gray backgrounds – neither pure villianess nor innocent victim – are too undefinable for readers. I personally would love to see more conflicted heroines.
Look at Buffy as the perfect example. Generally, she was a true heroine. But I recall some pretty questionable decisions she made (beating the h-e-double hockey sticks out of Spike in Season 6 comes to mind), pushing her into that gray space, IMO.
I love female writers (Julia Ross, CJ Cherryh, Jane Austen, Janet Evanovich), but my “keepers” are just as likely to be by men (Bernard Cornwell, Arturo Pérez-Reverte, Guy Gavriel Kay, P.G. Wodehouse).
And when it comes to tortured heroines, I gotta throw Faith out there. She was WAY more interesting than the goody-two-shoes Buffy (or, god forbid, Dawn, the Scrappy-Do of the Buffy world). Anya, too. God I miss Anya.
Perhaps this phenomenon is a close cousin to the virgin/whore dichotomy, where females who have gray backgrounds – neither pure villianess nor innocent victim – are too undefinable for readers.
I think this is part of it, definitely.
And when it comes to tortured heroines, I gotta throw Faith out there.
Absolutely! A perfect example. She had baggage to begin with (absent, alcoholic mother) that led to her choosing the mayor over the Scoobs, but her redemption made so much sense, emotionally. Looooved Faith.
I’d like to see more dark heroines–so I’m writing them.
Awesome.
I’m a finicky reader, but I try not to attach value judgments to my tastes. Sometimes I succeed better than others–I used to have a bad habit of litfic bashing, until someone pointed out that I was behaving just as badly as romance-bashers!
I don’t like reading anything that makes me feel like I’m wallowing in ugliness, nor anything that strikes me as a thinly veiled attempt to bash or discredit my core beliefs or values, but those aren’t *genres*. Naturally there are genres/subjects/settings that interest me less than others, but I think I’d try anything if the right person was behind it–say, Joss Whedon. Or, written/produced by Joss Whedon and starring Sean Bean. I’d be all over that even if it were, “Joss Whedon’s Reading the Phone Book and Watching Paint Dry, starring Sean Bean.”
At a guess, I’d say 80% of the fiction I read is by women, but I have plenty of male favorites–I treasure my boxed set of Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey/Maturin novels, and I’m in the middle of an extended Bernard Cornwell glom.
As for tortured heroines, I love stories that reverse the usual pattern of “sweet, sunny woman heals tortured and/or morally ambiguous hero.”
Were you a Xena fan, by any chance? She’s a classic example of a heroine with a dark past (she originally appeared as a villain on a Hercules ep) seeking redemption.
I think you’ve definately hit on something. I can’t think of many tortured heroines off the top of my head.
So did I miss it, or which books would you not read? I get that all the time ‘I don’t/never will read a romance’ *eye roll*
I’d try anything if the right person was behind it–say, Joss Whedon. Or, written/produced by Joss Whedon and starring Sean Bean. I’d be all over that even if it were, “Joss Whedon’s Reading the Phone Book and Watching Paint Dry, starring Sean Bean.â€
Bwah! You and me both.
Were you a Xena fan, by any chance?
I’ve caught parts of episodes in rerun several times, but I never watched the series in first run. It’s one of those things DVDs were made for — at some point I’d love to get the first season and indulge myself. Great rec, babe, thanks!
So did I miss it, or which books would you not read?
There’s really nothing I won’t read on principle. I would even try Susan’s rec of Aubrey/Maturin novels, although I don’t think I’d enjoy them much. I’ve read horror, some sci fi, fantasy, mystery, westerns, men’s action-adventure, pretty much everything. I’ve also read stuff I never would have picked up when I was copyediting, which is a cool exercise. You don’t get to put down something you don’t like when you’re copyediting it, you know?
There are some good tortured heroines in historical romance: Margot in Mary Jo Putney’s PETALS IN THE STORM and one of the edgiest tortured heroines, Melanthe in Laura Kinsale’s FOR MY LADY’S HEART. Julia Ross has done some great tortured heroines, too.
But I agree there are fewer of them. It does seem odd that bad behavior is more easily forgiven in a hero. Maybe the heroine healing the tortured hero is a more comfortable fantasy for some (the woman really in power) than in needing to be healed, being outwardly tough but inwardly vulnerable. Maybe that comes too close to the truth for some readers?
In my own books I’ve done several heroines that might be called tortured (though Little League compared to Putney, Kinsale, et al!) Some readers loved them, some couldn’t relate.
It won’t stop me from doing it again.
Maybe the heroine healing the tortured hero is a more comfortable fantasy for some (the woman really in power) than in needing to be healed, being outwardly tough but inwardly vulnerable. Maybe that comes too close to the truth for some readers?
I think you’ve really got it there — I remember when I was editing, one thing I always said to new writers, as a kind of shorthand, was the hero had to be someone I wanted to fall in love with, and the heroine (usually) someone I wanted to be.
In this case, though, maybe “being” the tortured heroine isn’t delivering the kind of fantasy readers want. And I think you’re absolutely right about the heroine healing the tormented/dark hero — that puts her in a position of power (not to mention a position traditionally revered for women — healer, “angel in the house,” a repersentative of what is good and loving in the world). Really interesting to think about.
I think this was a great post, Amy. Most of my knowledge of romance novels, to be honest, is from reading the backs of my wife’s books, though I have read a few. It seems like the typical romance heroine is a woman who is underappreciated in some way. She is not seen as beautiful, but she is. She is beautiful, but she is trapped by some circumstance. Or she is beautiful but her wit and fiery nature are not appreciated by her society. It is someone who has amazing qualities, but those qualities are not seen by others. At least, not until that perfect, crazy man enters her life and whisks her away to his pirate ship / gloomy estate / little house on the prairie, etc.
It is very tempting to psychoanalyze this dream, but I will largely hold back. My guess is that when more and more women stop feeling underappreciated – either because their smartness allows them to dominate higher education or their wit is celebrated on comedy central or whatever – then they will start reading about characters who are out there changing the world, but maybe not always for the better.
But what do I know? Nothing.
We’re hard on our heroines, for sure. Complex heroines like Melanthe from “For My Lady’s Heart” get comments from readers like “I didn’t like her” and “I couldn’t warm up to her”. As women, I think we think we have to be “likeable” all the time – who says? And at what cost? I’m more interested in a heroine who falls in the “unlikeable” category; I’d like to know what makes her tick, besides being pleasing….
Paranormal romance seems to lend itself more easily to tortured heroines. I’m thinking specifically of Gena Showalter’s stuff right now–the heroine of Awaken Me Darkly had more baggage than a Hilton family vacation.
I’m all for them myself, and I’m glad to see I’m not the only one writing some tortured heroines to fill the gap.
“Women aren’t eligible for combat”
A picky thing, but that so something-centric, you know.
I definitely write empowered women, but I’m not sure my heroines qualify as tortured. My upcoming Blaze heroine is an assassin and has a load of baggage, but she doesn’t wallow in it. She is not brooding. Most of my heroines who have questionable pasts (like my Marisela character who was in a gang, is under-educated but street smart) doesn’t regret her past–it’s the way it is. Does that keep the characters from being tortured?
Eve Dallas is the quintessential tortured heroine. She was victimized, but she is no victim. Even as her past becomes revealled to her, she doesn’t wallow in it. She deals. That’s the sort of tortured heroine I like to read…and write.
My guess is that when more and more women stop feeling underappreciated – either because their smartness allows them to dominate higher education or their wit is celebrated on comedy central or whatever – then they will start reading about characters who are out there changing the world, but maybe not always for the better.
That’s an interesting take. I hadn’t quite thought about it that way. Thanks!
the heroine of Awaken Me Darkly had more baggage than a Hilton family vacation
Bwah! Also, I clearly must get this book.
Even as her past becomes revealled to her, she doesn’t wallow in it. She deals.
Good distinction there, Julie. Whenever Angel wallowed, for instance, I wanted to smack him. Spike never wallowed, until the First was making him crazy, so that was a bit more forgivable. (And yes, I’ve reduced the conversation to BtVS references again. Sigh.)
Xena is a good recommendation for this theme – but I’d recommend series two rather than one for this. Season one was hit or miss with some good stuff and some not-quite-there stuff. Season two is all about darkness and redemption… at least, a lot of the key episodes are. Season three even more so, but best come to after season 2.
I can’t think of many tortured heroines in the romance genre, when we’re talking ‘questionable moral decisions’ rather than ‘awful stuff happened to her’. I think part of that is we tend to spend most of our time in the heroine’s head, and it’s frankly painful to have her doing things that are plain ick.
Mary Gentle’s ‘The Architecture of Desire’ had the heroine from several books act make a bad choice with horrible consequences in it. I find it pretty confronting, although I think she’s a fabulous writer – it actually made me feel betrayed because I was invested in the character from a previous book already.
I think it’s very hard in a genre that has a mantra of Happily Ever After – that promises you that no matter how grim things look, stuff will turn out happily. The kinds of dark choices by the MAIN CHARACTER found in, say, K.J. Parker and Mary Gentle need to allow the possibility that actually stuff can be done that no amount of being good afterwards can fix.
Tortured heroes are my absolute favorite, and I really love two of them: Calder Hart in Brenda Joyce’s DEADLY series, and Carlos Rivera, the conflicted sometimes vampire in L.A. Banks’s VAMPIRE HUNTRESS series. Both are wonderfully complex and torn.
I also recommend the hero and heroine in Connie Brockway’s ALL THROUGH THE NIGHT. Those two had some really serious issues to overcome, and all the conflict made for a great book.
Ann Christopher
I sometimes waffle between Buffy and Faith, lol. But it does sort of say something that when Buffy began her descent into darkness around Season 6 (and even her Riley-Initiative obsession of Season 4), viewers found her hard to tolerate, and yet Faith has continued to be a fan favorite.
I think that people tend to tolerate the wounded heroine if she’s wounded and her wounds cause her dark descent–it gives her a chance for redemption–whereas it’s seen as a betrayal when the fun, sunny girl becomes darker and resides in that uncomfortable gray area.
I like a good tortured heroine, but you all are right–they tend to be written as down-trodden victims, whereas tortured men are written as more able to go on with their life (albeit, superficially).
A romance gets an automatic HEA–guaranteed or your money back!–so why is it so hard for readers(and maybe writers) to “go there” with the heroine?
I think part of that is we tend to spend most of our time in the heroine’s head, and it’s frankly painful to have her doing things that are plain ick.
But that’s just it — is it more acceptable for the men to be doing icky things? I think most male heroes are given plausible and understandable reasons for doing questionable things, so why not women?
L.A. Banks’s VAMPIRE HUNTRESS series
Another one I’ll have to check out. And I’ve heard many, many good things about ALL THROUGH THE NIGHT, too.
when Buffy began her descent into darkness around Season 6 (and even her Riley-Initiative obsession of Season 4), viewers found her hard to tolerate, and yet Faith has continued to be a fan favorite
This is a great point (and I could write another essay or dozen on why I sympathized with Buffy during her Riley period, even though very few others did).
A romance gets an automatic HEA–guaranteed or your money back!–so why is it so hard for readers(and maybe writers) to “go there†with the heroine?
It is hard to understand. Part of the beauty of romance is knowing that things are going to work out in the end, and it seems to be that a hard, painful journey to get there, whether the hero’s or the heroine’s, would be cathartic.
I, for one, applaud the authors here who are writing dark heroines, and I’m making a big damn list so I can look for your books at some point.
“Maybe it’s easier to paint men this way – Alison Kent’s fabulous SG-5 series features heroes who have gritty, uncomfortable pasts, such as the military. Of course, women aren’t eligible for combat.”
Excuse me?
“Combat” is just a matter of semantics. To date, 57 female soldiers have died in Iraq.
Wake up.
A recent contemporary tortured heroine that works is in Jacey Ford’s Dead Heat. The hero’s not tortured, though he had gone through similar problems in the past.
“Combat†is just a matter of semantics. To date, 57 female soldiers have died in Iraq.
Wake up.
I know women have died in Iraq. In this case, though, I think the semantics are appropriate. As far as I understand, women can be combat support, but not front-line, waiting-in-the-foxhole-to-shoot-somone combat. And the psychological difference in those situations was what I was referring to.
There is no “front-line” really,not anymore.
And there are countries that have women in combat roles.
Odd–I tend to write messed-up heroines and stable heroes much more often than vice versa. Maybe because when I started reading and writing romances, my life felt like a total wreck. I would have loved to find a strong, stable (but not perfect–yech)guy.
No, women can’t serve in combat arms, that doesn’t meant they don’t serve in combat operations. I was “combat support†during Desert Storm with 3rd Armor Division. During the ground war we were often in front of combat arms units (such as artillery) and spent most of our time right behind the lead tank brigades.
Combat support is relative. Front line is relative. And SCUDs, artillery, bullets, IEDs don’t discriminate.
Thank you,Charity.
And if one is trained and prepared to “shoot-someone” if one’s convoy is attacked, for example, I doubt if there’s much psychological difference between “front-line” and “support.”
BTW, there are women soldiers in charge of tanks in Afghanistan.
Combat support is relative. Front line is relative. And SCUDs, artillery, bullets, IEDs don’t discriminate.
My mistake, then. Of course, I haven’t seen any heroines coming from that perspective, though, which would be interesting.
And if one is trained and prepared to “shoot-someone†if one’s convoy is attacked, for example, I doubt if there’s much psychological difference between “front-line†and “support.â€
BTW, there are women soldiers in charge of tanks in Afghanistan.
Again, my mistake. But I did say I knew very little about military operations and war… Sorry.
No problem, Amy. I think those of us who commented just wanted to make sure you were aware.
BTW, I know of a great (if yet unpublished) novel with a military heroine. The author’s a little shy though, so I don’t know how she’d feel about me tooting her horn (or would that be bugle?)
Also, one of my favorite novels of all time has a female spy who is not a villian — Little Drummer Girl by John LeCarre. The love story in it is absolutely fabulous.
I think you’re on to something with your conflicted heroine idea ;^)