The stage is set. Book one in a series comes out. Hero finds his heroine. She’s usually the first woman introduced into a clan of guys. The rest of the series is devoted to the remaining brothers, best friends, cousins or like a brother finding his woman as well.
Book two, second hero finds heroine. When introduced to first hero and heroine, the women quip about men being men, Neanderthals, second woman is welcomed into the fold, women immediately start a great endearing friendship whilst plotting against the men.
Book three, third hero finds heroine. Introduces her to the pack. Heroine one and two welcome her with open arms. The joke and confide all the juicy details of the men, roll their eyes, act like long lost buddies.
You know where I’m going with this. Everything is hunky dorey in romance land. The women of the group get along famously. Like sisters even. They all HEART one another on sight and know that the guy has done the best job ever in choosing his mate.
This is where I start laughing and rolling MY eyes.
Let’s face it. Women do not get along that well in real life. Women are bitchy. They are competitive. They do not tend to LOVE one another on sight. Sure it happens. Every once in a blue moon, but the cold hard facts are that women, especially when you group them into a pack, do not all love one another and get along famously.
I’m waiting for a more realistic series. You know when heroine three is introduced to heroines one and two and they immediately hate her on sight because she’s too confident, too pretty, too SOMETHING they can’t quite figure out, but they hate her anyway. Heck, women don’t need a substantive reason to tear each other down. I think it’s ingrained in the DNA somewhere.
But I’m curious as to why, in fiction, it seems like golden rule number one that the clan all embrace one another whole heartedly, that they go on to live HEA as one big happy, sappy group who are always there for each other, and would never ever do anything mean or heartless. Reminds me of the Stepford Wives or something. And I still say. Give me a break.
No related posts.
You know, I never gave the friendships in romances much thought – I guess it’s so ingrained in my reading experience I never thought to question it – I guess because it’s all part of the HEA, but yeah, it would be more interesting not to have everything be so perfect.
Kate Angell actually has a character like that in one of her books “Squeeze Play” – one of the women absolutely doesn’t get along with the others. Of course there is good reason, but there’s definitely no love lost there between the womenfolk.
I’ve never noticed that, but you have a point there. I work in a public library with an all female staff and I’ve never been around so much gossip and back-biting in my life. I don’t think junior high was this bad. Which is strange, because individially these are not evil, vindictive women we are talking about. I blame it on boredom-the job is not that difficult and like most places nearly everyone is overqualified for what they do. We need some men to make things interesting, but sadly I’ve seen very few in this field in the 10 years I’ve been in it. I for one have always gotten along better with guys than other women myself. I’m not sure why that is.
I’m with Stacy. I never thought about it. I just accepted that all the characters in a series group would love one another – but now that you mention it, wouldn’t it make for a juicy read and provide great conflict for the later stories if there wasn’t instant forever friendship between the new recruits in each book? Hmmm, you’ve got me thinking.
I figure the new-best-friend angle is as much wish-fulfillment as the hunky heroes. In a world where it’s easy to feel disconnected, where your best friend may move to the other side of the country and your sister get transferred to Hong Kong on short notice, I imagine many of us love the idea of that kind of sisterhood, that kind of one big happy family-ness.
Nora Robert’s Chesapeak Bay series and the McKade series. BOth of those had females come in later that weren’t exactly welcomed onsite.
But it’s just part of the fantasy. Just like meeting the drop dead gorgeous hunk and overcoming some major hurdle in 350… or much less… pages and going on to live happily ever after.
The romance is the key thing for me. Whether or not the relationships between the other characters is perfect doesn’t make that big an impact on me.
Wow — like the others, this never really occurred to me consciously until you pointed it out, but how true! I agree, too, that it’s probably part of the wish fulfillment thing — extended families aren’t so common anymore, and creating a new one, where everyone lives within shouting distance and love each other unconditionally, is a strong draw. But yeah, not exactly realistic. Great column!
Actually, Nora Roberts does it in her MacGregor series too, though only with one of the many women being added to the clan (Diana Blade).
However, I never thought much about it either. I have written a series myself where the women that marry into the family get along–however there’s not much face time between them so they’re not best buds or anything.
I think with family it’s a little different, while many people may have problems and women are definitely more critical especially when it comes to other women, there’s still a certain grace period when it comes to family–or least there should be. I happen to like all the women who have married into my family, but I don’t spend a whole lot of time with them either. But, that’s not to say I haven’t criticized them.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that while that can be true (Especially in the work place–like Sam H almost all my coworkers are women and YIKES), I think when it comes to family it’s not love at first site, but it’s not bitchery at first site either. A reserved politeness would be the most realistic for me.
Although, if the “clan” is a group of male friends, I do think it could be realistic to have the other women hate her on site. I just think, even with bithcy women, there’s another set of rules for family.
That’s why I loved writing Poe in my gIRL-gEAR series. All the heroines worked together, so they got along for the most part with the occasional spat. But Poe was an anti-heroine, and made no bones about it. Love writing women like that.
That’s a very good point, Sharon, and I can’t believe I never noticed that.
I think it depends on how things are set up. In Lisa Kelypas’s “Wallflowers” series, the women form friendships first, based on the common bond of their wallflower status.
Of course, I work for an organization where women outnumber men 6-1 and the large majority of us all get along really well without the b**chiness and troubles. So, I guess seeing groups of women get along in books doesn’t seem strange to me.
Hey, what if the series were based around a group of women and the men they dragged into the clan didn’t get along? That could be fun, too. However, one of the things I’m not overfond of are books where half the narrative seems to be injokes and nods about former books or hero-pimping for future books. I think it makes me too aware of the (wo)man behind the curtain.
I would imagine the situation would include more bitchiness even than normal because Heroine #1 – the first girl in a big batch of guys – might tend to take a proprietary stance about her boys. Sure, she’s chosen the one guy as her main man, but I’m sure she feels like all of those brothers/teammates/comrades are hers as well. So when a new chickie comes along looking to hook up with one of them, she would be pretty resistant to the idea of sharing any of the attention of her personal pack of gorgeous hunks. Talk about every girl’s fantasy – in love with one gorgeous hunk and surrounded by a bunch of others who think she’s just the greatest thing since sliced bread. Who would want an interloper messing that up?
But, then again, how often in reality do two people meet, begin a torrid affair, fall helplessly in love and get married in the course of a long weekend, all while being chased by bad guys? Romance and reality not necessarily happening too much. That’s okay. It’s why I read them.
I dunno. I think that a lot of female bitchiness and backbiting comes from insecurity. I think by definition a woman in the midst of her personal HEA isn’t experiencing any insecurity. She is not the slightest bit concerned about her man’s opinions on the new lady. And she doesn’t have any improper attachments to the other boys. So the only native source of conflict would be if the new lady somehow seems /bad/ for one of the boys. But even so, having a really solid relationship tends to make a person’s foundations that much more solid, so they can afford to be polite and wait and see for a while.
Have to say, this post made me go “Hmmm,” especially since all my gals in my series books get along — even though they do get on each other’s cases, like good friends/family members do from time to time.
But I think there are a couple of basic reasons why all those romance gals bond in series books. First off, these are feel-good books. As has been said, the whole meeting-and-falling-in-love-with-the-hunk scenario isn’t exactly realistic, either, but that’s why we read (or write) romance.
With all the relationship stress many of us deal with day to day, sometimes we just want a “safe” place to go, where everybody gets along. 
Secondly, you don’t want to clutter up the story with unnecessary conflict, especially in a category romance with a limited word count. I’m not saying the writer couldn’t use that heroine vs. previous heroine conflict in some way, on occasion, but for the most part it would be tricky.
After all — and this kind of ties in with my RTB post from last week — heroines have to be appealing, affable sorts, for the most part. Especially once they’ve got their HEA.
So any initial kerfuffles would probably have to be resolved fairly quickly, or — again — you end up going off on a tangent that might not have much to do with the story you’re trying to tell.
Again, it COULD work — I can see, for instance, the previous heroine(s) concerned that the hero was getting involved with someone they perceived as shallow, or ditzy, or whatever — but how often could you use that plot device?
Then again, we ARE talking romance, here. . .:mrgreen:
I’m not saying I object to the practice of having the female love fest as much as I find it highly unlikely
And Lynn, I think you nailed it ROFL!
Unsheath the claws.
Women are not innately nice.
Pleasant is one thing. A pushover is another.
This is SO why I hung out with the guys in high school. Well, *laughing*, that and a couple of other reasons.
Grins*
I’d noticed this in the past, but never really thought about it. It is pretty unrealistic to figure each woman is going to love the new girl in the family pack.
I was very lucky when my sister-in-law entered into our family. She’s just another one of the bunch, which works well. I’m always afraid that if I ever get married, I’m not going to get along with anyone because I’m just unique enough to be annoying. LOL!
I actually wrote a female character once who married into a family and did NOT get along with anyone, except her brother-in-law. Turns out there was some back history as time progressed, but she never fit in throughout the whole book.
I like showing the somewhat antagonistic side of life in my storied. I like showing some of the reality, because too much fantasy can be boring…right?
Unless my sisters-in-law hate me without my knowing it I think all the women that married into my husbands family get along.
Women marrying into some families have to bond together against the mother-in-law!!
Makes perfect sense to me, LOL!
My heroines don’t all like each other–the heroine of book #1 TERRIFIES that of book #5, for example, and #2 and #3 just wouldn’t understand each other. #4 and #1 would get along great–and, in fact, do–while #2 and #4 are best friends. Both #2 and #4 couldn’t help but be a bit contemptuous of the problems of #3 and #5.
Not all the heroes would like each other, either. #4 would think #2 is psychotic, #1 would resent both of them, #3 would always feel like an outsider, and #5 would only care about them (at the beginning) if they impinged on his narrow little world…
I agree with karen about why heroines get along.
I think heroes are less likely to get along, usually because most heroes feel protective of the women in their family post-HEA and pre-HEA most heroes are making the women miserable/annoyed/etc.
Try on Shelly Laurentson’s Dragon series. Her first heroine is universally disliked by everyone but the hero. I thought it was uber refreshing.
Jane, though I haven’t read Shelly’s dragon series, I did just finish reading Pack Challenge by her, and I enjoyed the heroine and her best friends. She actually made me believe in the close friendship of the “gaggle of girls.”
Because in romance, we get to meet, visit with, and enjoy our better selves. Enough cattiness in real life, don’t need it in fiction, not the longstanding kind anyway. Maybe some of the misunderstood kind, the kind that gets resolved by book end, right alongside the HEA.
Logical, Karen T., and well put.
I agree.
I’ve been studying romantic suspense — as opposed to simply enjoying the novels — for the last few months and you’re the first person I’ve come across who’s mentioned this pattern.
I did notice the big-happy-family phenomenon, of course. Got notes on it as I structure the cast of my first novel to launch a half-dozen others. But I took it as an unquestioned trope of the genre. Like science fiction space ships going faster than light or western heroines having a full set of white teeth. One is impossible and the other nearly so, but neither raises an eyebrow within their respective universes.
Now you’ve got me rethinking my assumptions. And that’s a good thing.