I finished reading through Masquerade (Vampires Realm #10) today, ahead of the final edit on the book before Christmas, and it got me thinking about something. So while I sit here in my living room, surrounded by my beautifully colourful Christmas tree and my net of lights in the window that is highlighting the rainy darkness outside, and I’m sipping hot chocolate, I’m going to ponder the following on my blog.
Do we always have to love the hero right from page one?
I rarely write heroes that aren’t one hundred and ten percent attractive from the word go. Okay, some of them might need a little work to smooth out their rough edges, a grudge they have, or some other flaw, but I can’t recall ever writing one that wasn’t already drop dead sexy in some way other than good looks.
This is what I’ve done with Masquerade, and therefore I’m experiencing weird feelings about it. I knew when planning it that the hero wasn’t going to start out as the apple of the reader’s eye because he’s complicated and is reacting in a rather brash male manner to certain events prior to the book. He is the way he’s meant to be at the beginning of the book, otherwise the story just wouldn’t work the way I wanted it to, but it still feels strange to me to have a hero who isn’t going to be capturing women’s hearts from the word go.
But should we really have to love all our heroes from the moment we meet them?
I don’t think so, and speaking to a few readers, and two lovely ladies in particular who have read the book for me, I feel that there is room for books where the hero starts out as a bit of a bastard / idiot / enemy / sexist pig / complete ass (delete as appropriate) as long as that hero redeems himself during the course of the story.
That’s the key thing in a romance involving a hero who starts out as a bad apple that needs a good polishing. Women love to redeem men, or fix them, or generally change them in some way. A hero who starts out acting like a complete ass has a certain appeal as long as the reader has faith that either the heroine is going to whip him into shape or, even better, he will realise the error of his ways and work his backside off to redeem himself and make things right.
I have read books where I haven’t enjoyed the hero at first. His attitude towards the heroine has sucked or he’s acted like a sexist pig, or he’s had no redeeming qualities… but in the end he’s proven himself worthy of my little show of faith in him and sorted himself out, and gone on to win the heroine’s heart.
As I ponder heroes who start out almost unlovable I can’t help thinking about heroines too. I think women love to fix men. Come on, admit it. And because the primary audience for a romance is a woman, it’s quite acceptable to have a hero who needs a little or a lot of fixing in order to make him a suitable contender for the heroine’s love.
But can a heroine be someone we don’t like at the start of the book?
See, this is where I think it wouldn’t work. We the reader play the role of the heroines in the books we read and I wouldn’t want to envisage myself as someone I didn’t like, or who was weak or acting like a complete ass. I have no desire to fix other women, or have to read a hero fixing a heroine’s flaws so they can eventually end up together. Funny how that works.
What do you all think about it? Are you happy reading books where the hero starts out a little bit of an ass as long as you trust the authors to introduce a good butt-kicking by the heroine to whip him into shape or him waking up and realising his errors and redeeming himself, fighting harder than ever to win the heroine’s heart? Could you read a book where the heroine started out as someone you didn’t like? I’d love your opinions on this!
