In literary fiction, we get all kinds of heroes, from sassy and brash, to sweet and romantic, to the anti-heroes who are self-loathing or wildly edgy. I personally love the anti-heroes of James Joyce's The Dead and Ulysses.
Typically, heroes in fiction face an external villain as well as the villains inside themselves. Doing battle with both really ups tension and relief and allows readers to fight vicariously against the wrongs in society.
But in Romance fiction, and most of its sub-genres, the hero is also the villain to the heroine. He's a grump or a tyrant or a renegade. Maybe he's the Rochester to your Jane Eyre, a married and bitter man to a sweet and innocent, though world-weary, ingenue.
Know the Villain Inside & Out
The point of the book is for him to "get" the heroine, which means the hero's villainy must be "overcome."
The issue is that the hero never really overcomes his bad-ass self in Romance. Often, he just learns to manage it better, such as when he's around the heroine. Frankly, if you take away his edge, he's a mush-man. And no heroine (or her reader) wants a mushy guy in a true Romance.
And that leads us to a character arc problem. The hero MUST change, MUST improve himself in order to win the heroine's acceptance.
Follow These 6 Tips to Achieve a Character Arc
So, how do you ensure change while allowing him to maintain his edge? Here are some examples of change the hero might present (based on the traditional male/female Romance relationship):
1) He's still a bad-ass, but she's now his ally. You don't bite your own pack member.
2) He uses his powers for good, not evil. He's more clearly aligned with defending innocents and battling bullies, especially as she "sees" them.
3) He lets her be on top. Ahem... I mean, he allows her to dominate in more areas, such as money or decisions or even where they eat, with the caveat that he "believes" he's still in charge. If you are already handling your husband this way, then you know what I mean.
4) He's willing to set aside friends in the name of love. Okay, so the guys will see it as a booty call, but the heroine needs to believe she's his #1 priority, not the Thursday Poker Night with the fellas.
5) He's more open to her than anyone else. More honest, more available emotionally, and more revealing than he previously was. This may be a change of centimeters as opposed to miles, as with the hero Roarke in JD Robb's "In Death" series, but so be it.
6) His edge is seen as an acceptable, if not cute, character flaw by the heroine. This is because she's able to overcome it through guile, wit, or just plain love.
This list surely can go on, but this will give you some tips to move that hero forward on his character arc, so your readers feel more satisfaction in seeing him truly change. But not dissolve into pudding.
Go forth and conquer!
Your Editor Devil.
These are great ideas. I love any tips that making an antagonist more "gray". Thanks for the post!
ReplyDeleteWe used to see this paradigm so often in early romance. Kathleen Woodiwiss and Rosemary Rodgers were expert at it. Some of those heroes would be seen as almost abusive these days. Ah, but then it was so satisfying to see the heroines bring them to their knees. I never really thought about how the authors 'turned them around' but it was so satisfying that I didn't even question it. Your tips gave me some great insight. Thanks, Christine.
ReplyDeleteThank you for this article, it is very helpful :) I remember the days when the bad/bloke/hero was so strong and silent as to be struck dumb and the heroine was so soppy (and always a nanny to his kids or something) that I couldn't understand who on earth would want to be bothered with her she was so boring! The only one who had any "go" in her was the "other woman" the BBH's current squeeze, who was inevitably red-haired(read "evil/cruel") and who lost the BHH in the end because he was secretly in love with the sop! Thank goodness those days are over. Mind you, sometimes now the heroine is so feisty that she's just a badly behaved, rude pain in the bum, proving it can swing too far the other way.
ReplyDeleteSuch a great list, Christine! Some of these were random, murky thoughts in my writer brain. Thanks for clarifying things for me.
ReplyDeleteI can't imagine where you got this blog post from. ;-0
ReplyDeleteThank you for even more amazing writing tips!
Food for thought -- thanks!
ReplyDeleteAlways expect spot on analysis and suggestions from you, Christine. Thanks as always.
ReplyDeleteI have a "good" situational story, but struggle with the hero. Tough situations aren't enough to drive the plot ... gotta find a better yearning goal so the reader goes beyond feeling sorry for him.
Thanks, Marion! And you're right--situations alone aren't enough. You have to have the complicated personalities to make those situations more interesting. And pity isn't a strong motivator, especially not for the reader. But someone who wants to overcome grief, that's someone we'll root for!
ReplyDeleteGood luck with your story!
Ellen, Jenny, and Laurie, thanks for your kind remarks!! I'm glad this was helpful :)
ReplyDeleteAnd Miss Julie, you definitely know where this thread came from, since you were there. Got me thinking that folks don't know how to translate the concept of hero/villain in one person and how that affects the character arc. So, off to solve the puzzle, I wrote the blog!
Thanks, Gail & Diana, for your historical comments. Sooooo true! You can't have the abusive bastard (though some border it and get away with it) and the strong, silent type is too invisible. I think the modern interpretations of these are: instead of abusive, try edgy/moody/impulsive/sharp/unpredictable; and instead of strong/silent try brooding/calculating/watchful and my favorite "acts without speaking" like the cowboy types.
ReplyDeleteWhatever you choose for your hero, have fun with him!
I hated those abusive males of the 1970's and 1980's and couldn't stand the wimpy females who fell for them. Equally the 'I hate you - i hate you' all through a novel until the final chapter 'Oh, I love you' did nothing for me.
ReplyDeleteI don't/can't think of my heroes as villains, I couldn't fall for the all-alpha male, so I couldn't empathise with my heroine falling for that type. Never liked Heathcliffe, for example, but Rochester and Darcy - yes. They had depth and also sensitivity beneath the image they presented to the world. That's my kind of hero.
Paula, my fav is Rochester. Like you, I can't stand Heathcliffe. Bitter to the point of abusive just isn't sexy in modern heroes (or ever?) Thanks for your comments!
ReplyDelete